Visually impaired customer alleges Mizuno USA website violates disability access laws

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
0Comments

A new federal lawsuit claims that a major online retailer is denying equal access to its products and services by failing to make its website usable for people who are blind or visually impaired. The complaint was filed by Livingston Bennett in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on March 20, 2026, naming Mizuno USA, Inc. as the defendant.

According to the filing, Bennett brings this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, arguing that Mizuno USA’s website (https://usa.mizuno.com) is not fully accessible to individuals who rely on screen-reading software due to visual impairments. The suit alleges that these barriers prevent blind and visually impaired customers from independently browsing, selecting, and purchasing goods online—activities available without restriction to sighted customers.

The complaint outlines several specific accessibility issues encountered by Bennett while attempting to shop for softball equipment and men’s sports clothing on December 22, 2025. These include missing alternative text for images, incorrect landmark structure, ambiguous link texts, inaccessible drop-down menus, lack of proper labeling on form fields, and requirements that transactions be completed solely with a mouse rather than allowing keyboard navigation. Bennett reports that these issues made it impossible for him to complete a transaction or even navigate the site effectively using his JAWS screen reader.

Bennett asserts that such inaccessibility constitutes discrimination under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation—including websites offering goods and services to the public. The complaint cites guidance from the United States Department of Justice stating that ADA requirements apply to all goods and services offered by public accommodations online.

The document details how technological advances have enabled many websites to be accessible through features like alternative text for images, accessible forms, descriptive links, resizable text, and keyboard navigation—all outlined in widely recognized standards such as version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). According to Bennett’s filing, Mizuno USA has not implemented these basic components despite their availability and adoption by other large businesses.

Bennett describes his experience attempting to use the website: “Plaintiff was denied a shopping experience like that of a sighted individual due to the Website’s lack of a variety of features and accommodations.” He further claims that “the Website contains significant access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use.”

The suit seeks class certification for all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted but been unable to access Mizuno USA’s website during the relevant statutory period. Common questions identified include whether the website qualifies as a public accommodation under federal law and whether it denies full enjoyment of goods or services based on disability status.

Bennett requests several forms of relief from the court: a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Mizuno USA to bring its website into compliance with ADA standards; compensatory damages for alleged unlawful discrimination; declaratory judgment affirming that current practices violate federal law; certification of a nationwide class; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs; attorneys’ fees; expert fees; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.

The complaint emphasizes ongoing harm if changes are not made: “Unless Defendant remedies the numerous access barriers on its Website, Bennett and Class Members will continue to be unable to independently navigate, browse, use, and complete a purchase on the Website.”

The plaintiff is represented by David B. Reyes of Equal Access Law Group PLLC. The case number is 1:26-cv-3174.

Source: 126cv03174_Livingston_Bennett_v_Mizuno_Usa_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf



Related

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Former assistant principal accuses Chicago Board of Education of discrimination and retaliation

A former assistant principal has filed a lawsuit against the Board of Education of the City of Chicago, alleging discrimination and retaliation based on her race, religion, and sex.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Legally blind consumers sue BudhaGirl jewelry company for inaccessible website under ADA

Two legally blind individuals have filed a lawsuit against BudhaGirl, LLC, alleging that the company’s website is not accessible to people with visual disabilities.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Former department supervisor sues Lowe’s Home Centers for alleged disability discrimination and retaliation

A former department supervisor has filed a lawsuit against Lowe’s Home Centers, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Trending

The Weekly Newsletter

Sign-up for the Weekly Newsletter from Illinois Courts Daily.