A lawsuit has been filed alleging that a major online retailer’s website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers, raising questions about equal access to digital commerce for millions of Americans. The complaint was brought by Phyllis Hampton on March 10, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Eos Products, LLC, a company known for its lip care and skincare products.
According to the filing, Hampton is legally blind and relies on screen-reading software to navigate websites. She claims that Eos Products’ website, https://evolutionofsmooth.com, contains significant access barriers that prevent her and others with similar disabilities from independently browsing or making purchases online. The lawsuit alleges these barriers violate Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation.
The complaint outlines several specific obstacles encountered by Hampton while attempting to shop for lip balm on November 11, 2025. These include missing alternative text on images, improper heading structure, ambiguous link descriptions, inaccessible pop-up windows, non-descriptive labels for interactive elements, lack of feedback after adding items to the cart, and an inability to complete transactions using only a keyboard. Hampton reports that these issues made it impossible for her to finish an order without assistance from a sighted person.
Hampton’s legal team states that despite widely available guidelines such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 and technology used by other retailers—including alternative text for images and keyboard navigation—Eos Products has not implemented these features. As a result, visually impaired users are allegedly excluded from accessing goods and services provided through the company’s website.
The complaint notes that this exclusion forces visually impaired individuals like Hampton to spend additional time or resources shopping at physical stores or relying on others for help online. It also references guidance from the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division affirming that ADA requirements apply to web-based goods and services offered by public accommodations.
In addition to recounting her personal experience with Eos Products’ website, Hampton seeks certification of a nationwide class action representing all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted but failed to access or purchase goods from the site during the relevant statutory period. The lawsuit argues there are common legal questions regarding whether Eos Products’ website constitutes a place of public accommodation under federal law and whether its current design denies equal enjoyment of its offerings.
The suit requests several forms of relief: a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Eos Products to make its website fully accessible in compliance with ADA standards; a declaration that current practices discriminate against people with visual impairments; certification as a class action; appointment of Hampton as class representative; reasonable attorneys’ fees; costs; pre- and post-judgment interest; and any further relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Hampton’s attorneys argue that making necessary changes would not fundamentally alter Eos Products’ business nor impose an undue burden. They allege that continued failure to address these barriers causes ongoing harm—including emotional distress—to those affected.
The case is identified as Case No.: 1:26-cv-2674. Phyllis Hampton is represented by Alison Chan of Equal Access Law Group PLLC.
Source: 126cv02674_Phyllis_Hampton_v_Eos_Products_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf
