A lawsuit filed in federal court alleges that a major provider of chickpea-based foods is denying blind and visually impaired individuals equal access to its online store, raising questions about digital accessibility standards for businesses serving customers nationwide. The complaint was submitted by Phyllis Hampton on March 9, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Banza LLC.
According to the filing, Hampton is legally blind and relies on screen-reading software to navigate websites. She claims that Banza LLC’s website, https://www.eatbanza.com, contains significant barriers that prevent her and others with similar disabilities from independently browsing products or completing purchases. The complaint states: “Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired individuals throughout the United States equal access to the goods and services Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through the Website.”
The document outlines several technical issues encountered by Hampton while attempting to shop online for a pizza set. Specific problems included poorly descriptive alternative text for images, lack of transcripts or audio tracks for video content, incorrectly defined landmark structures on web pages, hidden elements not announced by screen readers, interactive elements that could not be activated using keyboard commands, inconsistent focus order when navigating dialogs, overly long headings difficult for screen readers to interpret, non-descriptive names for interactive elements, navigation sub-menus that did not announce their state as collapsed or expanded, non-interactive elements marked as focusable without proper role attributes, and confirmation messages not announced by assistive technology.
Hampton describes an attempt on December 9, 2025 to purchase a Vegan Margherita Pizza from Banza’s website but was unable to complete the transaction due to these accessibility barriers. The complaint details: “While navigating the website using her screen reader software, she encountered multiple accessibility barriers… These accessibility barriers… prevented Hampton from successfully completing her intended purchase.”
The lawsuit asserts that these failures violate Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in places of public accommodation. The filing cites guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice stating that ADA requirements apply to all goods and services offered by public accommodations—including those provided online.
The plaintiff argues that accessible technology is readily available and widely used by other retailers but alleges that Banza LLC “has chosen to rely on an exclusively visual interface that provides no meaningful accommodations for Screen-reader-users.” As a result, visually impaired users must depend on sighted companions or visit physical stores—creating additional burdens such as arranging transportation or assistance—which would not be necessary if the website were accessible.
The complaint further notes industry standards such as version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2) published by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), which provide recommendations like adding invisible alt-text to graphics and ensuring all functions can be performed using only a keyboard.
Hampton seeks certification of a nationwide class consisting of all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access Banza’s website during the relevant statutory period but were denied full enjoyment of its goods and services due to access barriers. She requests both preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring Banza LLC to bring its website into compliance with ADA requirements so it becomes fully accessible to visually impaired users.
In addition to injunctive relief mandating changes in policies and practices related to digital accessibility, Hampton also seeks compensatory damages for herself and other class members who have allegedly suffered unlawful discrimination. The suit asks for declaratory relief confirming that Banza’s current operation discriminates against visually impaired consumers under federal law; certification of class action status; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs; reasonable attorneys’ fees; expert fees; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case is being handled by attorney Michael Ohrenberger of Equal Access Law Group PLLC. The case number is 1:26-cv-2631.
Source: 126cv02631_Phyllis_Hampton_v_Banza_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf