Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 1 of 12

U.S. District Court Northern District of Texas (Dallas) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:16−cv−01113−BK

CLOSED,JURY

Stanley et al v. Barbri Inc Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver Cause: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 04/25/2016 Date Terminated: 01/22/2018 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities − Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Claire Stanley

represented by Hani Mirza Texas Civil Rights Project 1412 Main Street, Suite 608 Dallas, TX 75202 972−333−9200 ext. 171 Fax: 972−957−7867 Email: hani@texascivilrightsproject.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

Abigail Hill Frank Texas Legal Services Center P.O. Box 41256 Austin, TX 78704 512/477−6000 Fax: 512/477−6576 Email: afrank@tlsc.org TERMINATED: 01/25/2017 Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

Deepa Goraya Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Af 11 Dupont Circle Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202−319−1000 x121 Fax: 202−319−1010 Email: deepa_goraya@washlaw.org PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted

Joseph M Sellers Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC West Tower 1100 New York Ave NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 202/408−4600 Fax: 202/ 408−4699 Email: jsellers@cohenmilstein.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted

Kristian L Hinson Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Affairs

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 2 of 12
11 Dupont Circle NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202−319−1000 Fax: 202−319−1010 PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Leah M Watson Washington Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Affairsf 11 Dupont Circle Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202−319−1000 x137 Fax: 202−319−1010 TERMINATED: 04/03/2017 PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Margaret Hart 700 14th Street NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20005 202−319−1000 x162 Email: margaret_hart@washlaw.org PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Matthew Handley Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Af 11 Dupont Circle Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 202−319−1000 x121 Fax: 202−319−1010 Email: matthew_handley@washlaw.org PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Shaylyn C Cochran Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll 1100 New York Ave NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005−3934 202−408−4600 Fax: 202−408−4699 Email: scochran@cohenmilstein.com PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Wayne Krause Yang Texas Legal Services Center 2101 S IH 35 Frontage Rd Suite 300 Austin, TX 78741 512−637−5566 Fax: 512−477−6576 Email: wyang@tlsc.org TERMINATED: 12/08/2016 Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 3 of 12

Plaintiff Derek Manners
Plaintiff Christopher Stewart

represented by Hani Mirza (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Abigail Hill Frank (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/25/2017 Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Deepa Goraya (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Joseph M Sellers (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Kristian L Hinson (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Leah M Watson (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/03/2017 PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Margaret Hart (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Matthew Handley (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Shaylyn C Cochran (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Wayne Krause Yang (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/08/2016 Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
represented by Hani Mirza (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 4 of 12
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Abigail Hill Frank (See above for address) TERMINATED: 01/25/2017 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Deepa Goraya (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Joseph M Sellers (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Kristian L Hinson (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Leah M Watson (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/03/2017 PRO HAC VICE Bar Status: Not Admitted
Margaret Hart (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Matthew Handley (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Shaylyn C Cochran (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Not Admitted
Wayne Krause Yang (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/08/2016 Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

V.
Defendant
Barbri Inc also known as Barbri Bar Review

represented by R Wayne Gordon Touchstone Bernays Johnston Beall Smith & Stollenwerck 1717 Main Street, Suite 3400 Dallas, TX 75201 214−741−1166 Fax: 214−741−7548

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 5 of 12

Mediator
ADR Provider TERMINATED: 10/17/2017

Email: wayne.gordon@tbjbs.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Amie P Fordan Touchstone Bernays Johnston Beall Smith & Stollenwerck LLP 1201 Em St 4040 Renaissance Tower Dallas, TX 75270 214/741−1166 Fax: 214/259−8751 Email: amie.fordan@tbjbs.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Jessica Glatzer Mason Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP 1000 Louisiana Street Suite 2000 Houston, TX 77002 713−276−5500 Fax: 713−276−5555 Email: jmason@gardere.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
represented by Jeff Kaplan JAMS 8401 North Central Expressway Suite 610 Dallas, TX 75225 214−744−5267 Fax: 214−720−6010 Email: jkaplan@jamsadr.com TERMINATED: 10/17/2017 LEAD ATTORNEY Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

Date Filed 04/25/2016
04/25/2016 04/25/2016

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Barbri, Inc.aka Barbri Bar Review filed by Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart, Derek Manners. (Filing fee $400; Receipt number 0539−7535002) Plaintiff will submit summons(es) for issuance. In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the Judges Copy Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information − Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: # 1 Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 04/25/2016)
2 Request for Clerk to issue Summons in a Civil Action filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart. (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 04/25/2016)
3 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Toliver). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (mem) (Entered: 04/25/2016)

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 6 of 12

04/25/2016 04/25/2016 05/16/2016
05/16/2016
05/17/2016 05/17/2016 05/23/2016 07/01/2016 07/01/2016
07/01/2016 07/05/2016 07/19/2016
07/20/2016 07/21/2016

4 Summons Issued as to Barbri Inc. (mem) (Entered: 04/25/2016)
5 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart. (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 04/25/2016)
6 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing for Attorney Matthew K. Handley (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−7582231) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice) (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 05/16/2016)
7 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing for Attorney Deepa Goraya (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−7582930) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order Proposed Order for Admission Pro Hac Vice) (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 05/16/2016)
8 ORDER granting 7 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Deepa Goraya. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 5/17/2016) (axm) (Entered: 05/17/2016)
9 ORDER granting 6 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Matthew K. Handley. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 5/17/2016) (axm) (Entered: 05/17/2016)
10 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Barbri Inc. Waiver sent on 5/2/2016. (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 05/23/2016)
11 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction () filed by Barbri Inc with Brief/Memorandum in Support. Attorney R Wayne Gordon added to party Barbri Inc(pty:dft) (Gordon, R) (Entered: 07/01/2016)
12 ANSWER to 1 Complaint with Jury Demand filed by Barbri Inc. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information − Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Gordon, R) (Entered: 07/01/2016)
13 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Barbri Inc identifying Corporate Parent/Other Affiliate Barbri Holdings, Inc for Barbri Inc. (Gordon, R) (Entered: 07/01/2016)
14 Order for Scheduling Order Proposal: Joint Proposed Scheduling Order due by 8/2/2016. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 7/5/2016) (trk) (Entered: 07/05/2016)
15 AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against Barbri Inc filed by Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart, Derek Manners. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information − Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 07/19/2016)
16 Joint MOTION to Extend Time for Defendants to File Response to First Amended Complaint and for Plaintiffs to File Motion for Class Certification filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 07/20/2016)
17 ORDER: Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint is extended to October 3, 2016, and the deadline for Plaintiffs to file their motion for class certification and brief in support is extended to January 11, 2017. It is further ORDERED that Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11 is DENIED as moot. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 7/21/2016) (aaa) (Entered: 07/21/2016)

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 7 of 12

08/01/2016 08/02/2016
08/02/2016 08/03/2016
08/22/2016
08/22/2016 10/03/2016 10/03/2016
10/17/2016 10/18/2016 11/03/2016 11/03/2016 11/17/2016

18 Joint MOTION for Protective Order filed by Barbri Inc (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 08/01/2016)
19 PROTECTIVE ORDER granting 17 Joint Motion for Protective Order. All persons subject to the terms of this Order agree that this Court shall retain jurisdiction over them for the purpose of enforcing this Order. The Court may enter this Order and such other and further relief as it deems appropriate, and this Protective Order is without prejudice to the right of any party to apply for relief from the Court, formally or informally, including as to matter discussed herein. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 8/2/2016) (ran) (Entered: 08/02/2016)
20 Joint Report Regarding Contents of Scheduling Order by Barbri Inc. (Fordan, Amie) Modified docket text on 8/3/2016 (rekc). (Entered: 08/02/2016)
21 ORDER OF TRANSFER: The Court TRANSFERS this case to United States Magistrate Toliver for the conduct of all further proceedings and the entry of judgment in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with any appeal therefrom to be taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(3). All future pleadings shall be filed under civil action number 3:16−cv−01113−BK. (Ordered by Judge Reed C O'Connor on 8/3/2016) (ran) (Entered: 08/03/2016)
22 SCHEDULING ORDER: Joinder of Parties and Amended Pleadings due by 11/7/2016. Discovery due by 3/20/2017. Deadline for mediation is on or before 4/3/2017. Joint Estimate of Trial Length and Status Report due by 4/10/2017. Dispositive Motions due by 4/17/2017. Pretrial Order and Pretrial Materials due by 10/16/2017. Pretrial Conference set for 10/27/2017 10:00 AM, Courtroom 1409, 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, TX 75242−1310 before Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver. Jury Trial set for 10/30/2017 in US Courthouse, Courtroom 1409, 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, TX 75242−1310 before Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 8/22/2016) (mcrd) (Entered: 08/22/2016)
23 STANDING ORDER ON NON−DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS (see Order for specifics). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 8/22/2016) (mcrd) (Entered: 08/22/2016)
24 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction , Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Barbri Inc with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Gordon, R) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
25 ANSWER to 15 Amended Complaint with Jury Demand filed by Barbri Inc. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information − Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Gordon, R) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
26 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to 24 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Goraya, Deepa) (Entered: 10/17/2016)
27 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 26 Motion to Extend Time to File Response/Reply. Plaintiffs' response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is due by 11/3/2016. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 10/18/2016) (chmb) (Entered: 10/18/2016)
28 RESPONSE filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 11/03/2016)
29 Appendix in Support filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart re 28 Response/Objection (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 11/03/2016)
30 REPLY filed by Barbri Inc re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Gordon, R) (Entered: 11/17/2016)

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 8 of 12

12/07/2016 12/08/2016 12/19/2016 12/26/2016 12/26/2016 12/26/2016
12/27/2016 12/27/2016 01/24/2017 01/25/2017 01/30/2017
01/31/2017 02/10/2017 02/10/2017

31 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Yang, Wayne) Modified text on 12/8/2016 (rekc). (Entered: 12/07/2016)
32 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 31 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Wayne Krause Yang is terminated as counsel. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 12/8/2016) (chmb) (Entered: 12/08/2016)
33 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Class Certification and Brief in Support filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order) (Goraya, Deepa) (Entered: 12/19/2016)
34 MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPROVING NOTICE OF REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE DISCLOSURE OF CONTACT INFORMATION filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 12/26/2016)
35 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart re 34 MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPROVING NOTICE OF REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE DISCLOSURE OF CONTACT INFORMATION (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 12/26/2016)
36 Appendix in Support filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart re 35 Brief/Memorandum in Support of Motion, 34 MOTION FOR AN ORDER APPROVING NOTICE OF REQUEST TO AUTHORIZE DISCLOSURE OF CONTACT INFORMATION (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A, # 2 Exhibit(s) B) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 12/26/2016)
37 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 33 Motion for Extension of Time to File Motion for Class Certification. Motion is due by 2/10/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 12/27/2016) (chmb) (Entered: 12/27/2016)
38 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 34 Motion for Order approving Notice of Request to authorize disclosure of contact information Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 12/27/2016) (chmb) (Entered: 12/27/2016)
39 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Plaintiff's Motion to Withdraw filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Frank, Abigail) (Entered: 01/24/2017)
40 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 39 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Abigail Hill Frank is terminated. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 1/25/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 01/25/2017)
41 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing for Attorney Leah M. Watson (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−8171535) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order) (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 01/30/2017)
42 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 41 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Leah M. Watson. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days of the date of this order. See Local Rule 5.1(f). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 1/31/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 01/31/2017)
43 MOTION to Certify Class filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Conference, # 2 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 02/10/2017)
44 (Document Restricted) Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal Pending Further Court Order(Sealed pursuant to motion to seal) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Conference, # 2 ***UNSEALED per 51 Order*** Memorandum in Support of Motion, # 3 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) Docket entry security for Doc. 44−2 and text modified on 3/13/2017 (twd). (Entered: 02/10/2017)

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 9 of 12

02/10/2017 03/02/2017
03/08/2017 03/10/2017 03/10/2017 03/10/2017 03/13/2017
03/15/2017 03/17/2017 03/20/2017 03/21/2017
03/31/2017 04/03/2017 04/03/2017 04/03/2017

45 (Document Restricted) Sealed Appendix in Support re: 44 Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal Pending Further Court Order filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart. (cea) (Entered: 02/13/2017)
46 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to 43 MOTION to Certify Class, 44 (Document Restricted) Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal Pending Further Court Order filed by Barbri Inc. (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 03/02/2017)
47 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 46 Motion to Extend Time to File Response/Reply. Response due by 3/10/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 3/8/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 03/08/2017)
48 RESPONSE filed by Barbri Inc re: 43 MOTION to Certify Class (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 03/10/2017)
49 Appendix in Support filed by Barbri Inc re 48 Response/Objection (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 03/10/2017)
50 RESPONSE filed by Barbri Inc re: 44 Sealed Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Memorandum of Law in support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal Pending Further Court Order (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 03/10/2017)
51 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting in part and denying in part sealed and/or ex parte motion 44 . The Clerk is DIRECTED to unseal Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Class Certification [Doc. 44−2]. Plaintiffs' Supporting Appendix [Doc. 45] shall remain under seal. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 3/13/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 03/13/2017)
52 Joint Motion for Modification of Scheduling Order filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 03/15/2017)
53 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to 48 Response/Objection filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 03/17/2017)
54 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 53 Motion to Extend Time to File Response/Reply. Plaintiffs' Response is due by 4/5/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 3/20/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 03/20/2017)
55 ORDER granting Motion 52 for Modification of the Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 5/31/2017. Deadline for mediation is on or before 6/19/2017. Joint Length of Trial and Status Report due by 6/26/2017. Dispositive Motions due by 9/18/2017. Pretrial Materials and Pretrial Order due by 1/22/2018. Pretrial Conference set for 2/16/2018 at 10:00 AM and Jury Trial set for 2/20/2018 at 09:00 AM in US Courthouse, Courtroom 1409, 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, TX 75242−1310 before Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 3/21/2017) (mcrd) (Main Document 55 replaced on 3/22/2017) (mcrd). (Entered: 03/21/2017)
56 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 03/31/2017)
57 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 56 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Leah M Watson is hereby permitted to withdraw. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 4/3/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 04/03/2017)
58 MOTION To File Excess Pages in Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Class Certification re 43 MOTION to Certify Class , 48 Response/Objection filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Conference, # 2 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 04/03/2017)
59 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−8319425) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s), # 2 Proposed Order)Attorney Joseph

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 10 of 12

04/03/2017
04/04/2017 04/04/2017 04/04/2017 04/05/2017
04/19/2017 05/03/2017 05/22/2017 05/23/2017 06/09/2017 06/13/2017 06/14/2017

M Sellers added to party Derek Manners(pty:pla), Attorney Joseph M Sellers added to party Claire Stanley(pty:pla), Attorney Joseph M Sellers added to party Christopher Stewart(pty:pla) (Sellers, Joseph) (Entered: 04/03/2017)
60 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−8319489) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s), # 2 Proposed Order)Attorney Shaylyn C Cochran added to party Derek Manners(pty:pla), Attorney Shaylyn C Cochran added to party Claire Stanley(pty:pla), Attorney Shaylyn C Cochran added to party Christopher Stewart(pty:pla) (Cochran, Shaylyn) (Entered: 04/03/2017)
61 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 58 Motion. The page limit for Plaintiffs' Reply to the Motion for Class Certification is not to exceed Fifteen (15) pages (exclusive of exhibits, the list of exhibits, the Table of Contents, and Table of Authorities, and cover caption page). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 4/4/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 04/04/2017)
62 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 59 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Joseph M. Sellers. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 4/4/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 04/04/2017)
63 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 60 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Shaylyn Cochran. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 4/4/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 04/04/2017)
64 (Document Restricted) Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal (Sealed pursuant to motion to seal) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in Support of Their Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Representatives and Class Counsel, # 2 Appendix to Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in Support of Their Motion for Class Certification and Appointment of Class Representatives and Class Counsel, # 3 Certificate of Conference, # 4 Proposed Order) (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 04/05/2017)
65 RESPONSE filed by Barbri Inc re: 64 Sealed Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits under Seal pending further Court Order (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 04/19/2017)
66 REPLY filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart re: 64 Sealed Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Class Certification and Accompanying Appendix of Exhibits Under Seal. (Handley, Matthew) (Entered: 05/03/2017)
67 MOTION for Modification of the Scheduling Order filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cochran, Shaylyn) (Entered: 05/22/2017)
68 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 67 Joint Motion for Modification of the Scheduling Order. Fact discovery must be completed by 6/30/2017. The deadline for the submission of a joint estimate of trial length and status report is 7/26/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 5/23/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 05/23/2017)
69 Alternative Dispute Resolution Summary filed by Jeff Kaplan. Attorneys in Attendance: Matthew K. Handley, Hani Mirza, Shaylyn Cochran, R. Wayne Gordon and Amie P. Fordan. Prv Fee: $ 5,390.00. Outcome of ADR: Continuing to work with parties to reach a settlement. (Kaplan, Jeff) (Entered: 06/09/2017)
70 Joint MOTION to Stay or Abate this Case Following Mediation filed by Barbri Inc (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 06/13/2017)
71 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 70 Motion to Stay. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 6/14/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 06/14/2017)

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 11 of 12

06/15/2017 06/19/2017
06/26/2017 07/20/2017 07/21/2017 10/16/2017
10/17/2017 10/26/2017
11/17/2017 11/20/2017 12/20/2017 12/28/2017 01/19/2018 01/22/2018 07/01/2019 08/08/2019

72 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Jessica Glatzer Mason on behalf of Barbri Inc. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Mason, Jessica) (Entered: 06/15/2017)
73 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing for Attorney Kristian Hinson (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−8481859) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order) (Mirza, Hani) (Entered: 06/19/2017)
74 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 73 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Kristian Hinson. If not already done, Applicant must register as an ECF User within 14 days (LR 5.1(f)). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 6/26/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 06/26/2017)
75 Joint MOTION to Extend Time of Abatement filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Cochran, Shaylyn) (Entered: 07/20/2017)
76 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 75 Motion to Extend Time. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 7/21/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 07/21/2017)
77 ELECTRONIC ORDER: On July 21, 2017, the Court granted the parties an abeyance of this case for settlement purposes until October 6, 2017. The abeyance has expired and the parties have not updated the Court on the status of the case. Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to file a status update no later than 11/6/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 10/16/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 10/16/2017)
78 Alternative Dispute Resolution Summary filed by Jeff Kaplan. Attorneys in Attendance: Matthew K. Handley, Deepa Goraya, Shaylyn Cochran, Hani Mirza, R. Wayne Gordon, Amie P. Fordan and Jessica Glatzer Mason. Prv Fee: $ 5,450.00. Outcome of ADR: Settled as a result of ADR. (Kaplan, Jeff) (Entered: 10/17/2017)
79 ORDER: The parties are directed to file the appropriate dismissal papers: a stipulation of dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), or an agreed motion with corresponding proposed order, no later than 11/24/2017. If a stipulation of dismissal or motion to dismiss is not filed by 11/24/2017, and further proceedings become necessary or desirable, the parties should immediately file a Joint Status Report. All scheduling deadlines are stayed until further order of the Court. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 10/26/2017) (mcrd) Modified on 11/2/2017 (Toliver, Renee). (Entered: 10/26/2017)
80 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Closing Documents filed by Barbri Inc (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 11/17/2017)
81 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 80 Motion for Extension of Time to File Final Dismissal Papers. Dismissal Papers are due by 12/22/2017. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 11/20/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 11/20/2017)
82 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Closing Documents filed by Barbri Inc (Fordan, Amie) (Entered: 12/20/2017)
83 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 82 Motion for Extension of Time to File Dismissal Papers. Final dismissal papers are due by 1/22/2018. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 12/28/2017) (chmb) (Entered: 12/28/2017)
84 Joint STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL and to Approve Consent Decree by Barbri Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A − Consent Decree) (Gordon, R) (Entered: 01/19/2018)
85 CONSENT DECREE. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 1/22/2018) (zkc) (Entered: 01/22/2018)
86 Joint STIPULATION to Extend Time for Compliance with Consent Decree by Barbri Inc. (Mason, Jessica) (Entered: 07/01/2019)
87 Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice with Certificate of Good Standing (Filing fee $25; Receipt number 0539−10175652) filed by Derek Manners, Claire Stanley, Christopher Stewart (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Certificate of Good Standing)Attorney Margaret Hart added to party Derek Manners(pty:pla), Attorney Margaret Hart added to party Claire Stanley(pty:pla), Attorney Margaret Hart added to

Case: 3:16-cv-1113 As of: 05/18/2020 01:43 PM CDT 12 of 12

08/12/2019 09/25/2019

party Christopher Stewart(pty:pla) (Hart, Margaret) (Entered: 08/08/2019)
88 ELECTRONIC ORDER GRANTING Doc. 87 Plaintiffs' Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of Margaret Hart. Important Reminder: Unless excused for cause, an attorney who is not an ECF user must register within 14 days of the date the attorney appears in a case pursuant to LR 5.1(f) and LCrR 49.2(g). (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver on 8/12/2019) (chmb) (Entered: 08/12/2019)
89 NOTICE of Website and Mobile Application Correction re: 85 Judgment filed by Barbri Inc (Mason, Jessica) (Entered: 09/25/2019)

 </s> Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 1 of 22 PageID 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

CLAIRE STANLEY, DEREK MANNERS, §

and CHRISTOPHER STEWART, on behalf §

of themselves and all others similarly

§

situated,

§

Plaintiffs, §

v.

§

§

BARBRI, INC. aka BARBRI BAR

§

REVIEW,

§

Defendant. §

Civil Action No. ____________________ JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, and Christopher Stewart respectfully file this

Complaint on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated blind law students against

Defendant BarBri, Inc., which enrolled them in bar review courses to study for the bar

examination, but refused to remove several accessibility barriers to its mobile application,

website, and course materials, thereby leaving them with inferior preparation services and

preventing them from effectively preparing for their bar exams, and state as follows:

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

1. Defendant BarBri, Inc., aka BarBri Bar Review (“BarBri”), by far the largest bar

preparation course in the country, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §

12182, et seq. (“ADA”), and Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code., Tex. Hum. Res.

Code § 121.001, et seq. (“Chapter 121”) by maintaining barriers to the accessibility of its

services for blind students who use talking screen reading software and failing to make

reasonable accommodations or provide auxiliary aids or services, and thus unnecessarily hinders

blind students from entering the legal field by preventing them from fully, equally, and

adequately preparing for the bar exam.

1

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 2 of 22 PageID 2
2. In this putative class action lawsuit, Plaintiffs seek an order requiring BarBri to provide bar examination preparation services that are accessible to blind students, so that they can enjoy full and equal access to BarBri’s bar review services, including the website and mobile application that BarBri uses to prepare students for the bar exam. This action also seeks compensation for blind students who signed up for and relied on BarBri’s review services to study for their bar exams, but found these services to be inaccessible to them and other blind students.
3. All three named Plaintiffs are blind individuals who either used, or who already paid BarBri and plan to use, BarBri’s bar review course to study for a past or future bar exam, but encountered, or are aware that they will encounter, significant accessibility barriers to BarBri’s website, http://www.barbri.com, and mobile application (BarBri App (v1.5.1)). In this action, Plaintiffs seek to redress the injuries they have suffered or will suffer if BarBri is allowed to continue to discriminate against blind students in violation of federal and state law.
JURISDICTION 4. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(4), because Plaintiffs assert a federal civil rights claim under the federal ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ Texas state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant, including general jurisdiction, as Defendants’ corporate headquarters are located in this District. 6. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), as both Defendants reside in this district, where their corporate headquarters are located. Venue is also proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise
2

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 3 of 22 PageID 3
to the federal and state claims occurred in this district. In addition, the terms and conditions on BarBri’s website state that students who wish to assert legal claims against BarBri should bring those claims in this federal district.
PARTIES 7. Plaintiff Claire Stanley is a resident of Silver Spring, Maryland and took the Pennsylvania bar exam in July 2015. As she did not pass, she plans to take the bar exam again in July 2016. Claire is blind and uses the Job Access With Speech (“JAWS”) screen reader on her computer to access and review materials on the Internet. She also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver (a talking screen reader for all Apple Products) to access all of the menus and applications on her phone. 8. Claire became interested in advocacy for herself and others beginning in high school, when she became involved with the National Youth Leadership Network, a youth-led and youth-driven national non-profit organization to promote youth leadership and education. It is a national voice for young leaders with disabilities. Claire was even selected to travel to attend a NYLN conference. 9. From then on, Claire knew that she wanted to be a lawyer, and majored in political science in college. She applied to attend law school during college and was delighted to begin law school after her graduation. 10. Claire realized that she wanted to practice disability rights law or general civil rights law, and never strayed from this goal during law school. She held internships at various civil rights and disability rights organizations and federal agencies, including at the Department of Justice, Disability Rights Section.
3

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 4 of 22 PageID 4
11. Claire is now a fellow at the federally mandated protection and advocacy agency for the rights of people with disabilities in Washington DC, University Legal Services. Once she is able to pass the bar, she will finally be able to fully represent her clients and achieve her goal of being a civil rights attorney.
12. Plaintiff Derek Manners is a third year law student at Harvard Law School and plans to take the bar exam in July 2016. Manners is blind and uses JAWS on his computer to access and review materials on the Internet. He also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver to access all of the menus and applications on his phone.
13. Derek was curious about being an attorney from a young age. His interest in the connection between policy and the law inspired him to join the debate team in high school.
14. In college at the University of Texas, he majored in political science and economics, and knew he wanted to practice political law.
15. During law school, Derek interned at the Office of the Connecticut Attorney General, where he investigated a Wall Street bank that was heavily involved in the mortgage security crisis.
16. Derek also served as the Legislative Director for the National Federation of the Blind (a civil rights advocacy group lead by and consisting of blind individuals from around the country) of Massachusetts, where he monitored legislation at the state level that affected persons with disabilities, was the point person for coordinating meetings with members of Congress in Massachusetts, and mobilized NFB of Massachusetts membership for social media campaigns.
17. Derek just began working part-time at the National Federation of the Blind in their Governmental Affairs Office, and will be starting a job at the firm of Allen & Overy
4

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 5 of 22 PageID 5
(practicing political law) in the fall. He will need to pass the bar in order to achieve his goal of practicing political law.
18. Plaintiff Christopher Stewart is a third year law student at the University of Kentucky College of Law and plans to take the bar exam in July 2016. He is blind and uses JAWS on his computer to access and review materials on the Internet. He also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver to access all of the menus and applications on his phone.
19. Christopher always had an interest in government and political science, as well as the law. His passion for social justice dates back to elementary school, when he first read To Kill a Mockingbird. It remains one of his favorite novels.
20. As an undergraduate, he majored in violin performance and worked as a professional violinist for a few years. But his passion for law drove him to attend law school.
21. During law school, Christopher worked for the Kentucky attorney general, where he was involved in researching how new EPA regulations under the Clean Air Act impact the state. This issue is now being litigated by attorneys general from over a dozen states.
22. Christopher also worked for one of Kentucky's leading trial lawyers, where he prepared pleadings, motions, and briefs for cases involving issues as diverse as medical malpractice, qui tam, and aircraft mechanical negligence.
23. In addition, he served as president of his law school's Election Law Society and American Constitution Society, and was an editor of his school's flagship law review for two years. Christopher served as Legislative Director for the National Federation of the Blind of Kentucky, as well. His duties included meeting with representatives of Kentucky's entire congressional delegation, advocating for specific issues important to blind individuals in
5

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 6 of 22 PageID 6
Kentucky and nationally, participating in face-to-face meetings, making phone calls, and coordinating letter writing campaigns.
24. Christopher will serve as a federal law clerk after graduation. Following his term, he hopes to practice employment law, and would like to work on the defense side, helping companies create an ADA accessibility plan and favorably resolve claims of discrimination.
25. Christopher recently got married and will soon graduate from law school. He hopes to pass the bar before beginning his clerkship.
26. Defendant Barbri, Inc., aka BarBri Bar Review, is a company that sells and provides to students a bar exam preparation course, which includes online and in-person lectures.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 27. For sighted and blind people, the Internet is a significant source of information and education, and offers a wealth of information, services, and products with instant availability and without the need to travel. For students, the Internet has become a critical and necessary tool for learning, studying, and preparing for examinations, especially for students who study for the bar exam in jurisdictions across America. In many places of higher education in America, the Internet is the exclusive or primary means by which students learn and interact with their teachers and classmates. 28. Like other educational institutions and exam preparation courses that have increased their reliance on the Internet to teach, inform, and evaluate students, BarBri has significantly increased its use of Internet-based resources in its bar exam preparation courses. For example, BarBri offers an online live chat feature to connect students with tutors, an online planner, online practice questions and study outlines, online lecture notes, and online lecture videos. Upon information and belief, by harnessing the power of the Internet to teach its bar
6

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 7 of 22 PageID 7
examination courses, BarBri has reduced its costs per student and increased its ability to earn revenue and profit from its bar review courses.
29. Blind individuals access the Internet from computers by using screen access software, which vocalizes visual information on a computer screen or displays the content on a refreshable Braille display. This software represents the only method by which blind Americans can independently access the Internet and related computer screen software programs. Without Internet software and applications that can be used in conjunction with screen access software, blind persons cannot fully access the information, services, and products that companies like BarBri provide through the Internet.
30. Several screen access software programs are available to blind users of Windows and Apple operating system-enabled computers and devices. The most popular screen access software for a Windows computer is Job Access With Speech (“JAWS”), which must be purchased and installed separately. For Apple users, the only screen access software is VoiceOver, which is built into all Apple products. While each software program may have differences in how the user operates the software, each program requires information on the Internet to be capable of being rendered into text so that blind computer users may access it.
31. Claire Stanley graduated from law school in the Spring of 2015. Derek Manners and Christopher Stewart will graduate from law school in the Spring of 2016.
32. Like most law students, Claire knew she would have to take a bar prep course to pass the bar. So, before graduating from law school, Claire entered into an agreement to take BarBri’s bar exam course and relied on BarBri’s resources to prepare her to take and pass the bar examination.
7

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 8 of 22 PageID 8
33. Derek and Christopher are third year law students who also want to become lawyers and must also take the bar exam to do so. They have already entered into similar agreements and will rely upon BarBri’s resources to prepare them to take and pass bar examinations.
34. Both Derek and Christopher have requested reasonable accommodations from BarBri, and BarBri has assured both of them that its bar review courses will be fully accessible to them and will provide them with an equivalent preparation to take the bar exam.
35. Defendant’s website and mobile application provide practice questions to help students to prepare for the Multistate Bar Exam (“MBE”), which is a one-day multiple choice test that all students must take to pass the bar exam in any state (with the exception of Louisiana). BarBri’s website and mobile application provide feedback to students on essay topics, and offer many other features to help students to study for and prepare for taking the bar examination in July or February of each year. BarBri’s website and mobile application are used extensively and regularly nationwide, including in the state of Texas. According to its website, www.thebarbrigroup.com/the-new-barbri/bar-review, it is the “only course available to students in all fifty states... With significant cost of law school education and so much at stake, it makes sense for law students to choose a proven partner and support system they can count on to teach what they need to know to pass the bar exam, the first time. BarBri has become synonymous with bar prep success,” and has become the “#1 most trusted” bar review course in the United States.
36. On the front page of BarBri’s website, www.barbri.com, there is a link to a web page entitled “ADA ACCOMMODATION,” which states that “BarBri complies with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and provides appropriate auxiliary aids and services to
8

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 9 of 22 PageID 9
students with disabilities to ensure effective communication.” BarBri was displaying the same statement on its website during the time that each of the Plaintiffs enrolled in BarBri’s bar review course and at the time that Claire was preparing to take the bar exam. BarBri’s enrollment form is used nationwide and also states that, “BarBri complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and provides appropriate auxiliary aids and services to students with disabilities.”
37. When Claire was studying for the bar exam, BarBri’s website identified an ADA Manager to whom students with disabilities should direct inquiries about BarBri’s compliance with the ADA and/or requests for reasonable accommodations: ADA Director, BARBRI Bar Review, 200 W. Adams, Suite 250, Chicago, IL 60606, Fax: (312) 288-4607, ADARequests@BARBRI.com.
38. On the same page that BarBri promises that it complies with the ADA, BarBri states that “practice testing” is one of the “three main components of the BARBRI course,” in addition to “lectures” and “substantive law outlines.” BarBri’s website further states that “The BARBRI course is different from law school courses. It is extremely condensed and requires you to blend the three components above to bring you to peak performance for your bar exam.” BarBri’s practice testing primarily occurs on the BARBRI website, www.barbri.com. Accordingly, BarBri is and has been fully aware that students with disabilities, including blind students, need to be able to fully access BarBri’s website to engage in the practice testing that is a critical and necessary part of preparing for the bar exam.
39. BarBri prepares students to take the bar examination in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Every jurisdiction except for Louisiana administers and relies upon the results of the MBE, which is a 200-question multiple-choice examination that the National Conference of Bar Examiners developed. In addition to requiring students to take the MBE,
9

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 10 of 22 PageID 10
jurisdictions require students to answer a variety of essay questions in narrative form and statespecific multiple choice questions to evaluate their legal analysis and writing skills. BarBri’s courses and materials prepare students to master all portions of the relevant state bar exam, score as high as possible on the exam, and pass the exam. In the jurisdictions where students take the MBE, BarBri uses “MPQ Question Sets” for students to review and answer questions that are the same or similar to the questions that will be asked in the MBE during the bar exam.
40. It is very important for students to score as high as possible on the MBE, because in most jurisdictions the MBE provides students with the largest – or one of the largest – opportunities to earn points that are needed to meet the minimum point threshold for passing the bar exam in the relevant jurisdiction. In addition, some jurisdictions will only allow lawyers who have already been admitted to another jurisdiction to waive into their state bars if they previously obtained a specific MBE score during a prior bar exam. Thus, even if a student has passed the bar exam in a jurisdiction, such as Texas, he or she may not automatically be able to become a member of another jurisdiction, such as the District of Columbia, if his or her MBE score on the prior bar exam did not meet a certain threshold. Instead, he or she would have to take a new bar exam, and would likely incur further expenses and time to prepare to take the bar exam again.
41. Prior to commencing her bar review course in 2015, Claire contacted BarBri’s former National ADA Director, Kate Levine, and requested that her textbooks, lecture notes, and handouts be provided to her in an electronic format so that she could access them. Defendant’s employee assured Claire that it would provide these materials in an accessible format. Christopher has also contacted Defendant’s current national ADA manager to request materials for the July 2016 bar review course in an alternate format, and Defendant has assured him that
10

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 11 of 22 PageID 11
they will be made accessible to him. Derek has submitted his request to BarBri’s current national ADA manager for similar accommodations for the July 2016 bar.
42. While studying for the July 2015 bar exam, BarBri’s website began creating difficulties and preventing Claire from accessing it, including the “MPQ Question Sets” in the StudySmart section that allows students to engage in practice testing for the MBE. While Defendant’s website allowed Claire to read the text of the questions, it prevented her from reading the answer choices, as they appeared in an inaccessible flash window.
43. Defendant’s barriers persisted when Claire was studying for the February 2016 exam, as Defendant failed to make the answer choices readable line-by-line. BarBri instructs students to first read the “call of the question” before reading the question itself, yet it was preventing her from doing so by keeping her from first reading the answer choices before scrolling back up and reading the question itself. Because Defendant forced Claire to read the question and answer choices in chronological order without pause, she could not take the practice in the manner BarBri advised its customers to properly take the tests.
44. BarBri proclaims the “Essay Architect” feature of its website will help students write better essays for bar exams. Students using Essay Architect must rearrange phrases in a pre-written essay to organize them in the proper format, and this is done by dragging and dropping the phrases. They receive feedback in the margins about their formatting. Defendant did not provide this feature to Claire, though, because it would not make the drag-and-drop function accessible to her screen reader. BarBri also failed to allow her to detect that certain phrases relating to the area of law covered by the essay were highlighted with her screen reader, thereby preventing Claire from receiving the vital feedback on essay construction that she needed and that all of her sighted peers were receiving.
11

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 12 of 22 PageID 12
45. Defendant also failed to make the same features on its website accessible to Claire when she used BarBri’s iOS mobile application. Thus, Defendant effectively denied the use of this significant feature of the bar review course to Claire.
46. Defendant also failed to remove accessibility barriers to BarBri’s electronic versions of the books and lecture handouts. The PDF versions of books and handouts did not contain page numbers detectable by JAWS, and the Microsoft Word versions of the same documents did not provide indicia of the page numbers corresponding to the PDF and hard copy versions. BarBri unnecessarily made it difficult for Claire to locate certain sections of the textbooks specified in lectures or in the online planner.
47. Furthermore, Defendant printed the Braille version of its Conviser “mini review” with inaccurate use of Braille italics indicators. This is an important book that provides an outline of the materials students are supposed to study for the bar exam. BarBri placed Dots 4-6 Braille italics symbols in front of each word in an italicized portion, instead of proper brailling, which would have these symbols at the beginning and end of an entire portion of the text, not in front of each word. In doing so, Defendant made it extremely and unnecessarily difficult for Claire to read the mini review.
48. Claire complained to BarBri’s National ADA Director about these accessibility barriers and requested that they be removed, but BarBri did not take any action to modify or fix the inaccessible features on its website or app, and did not take any action to address the accessibility issues with BarBri’s books and lectures, even though removing these barriers is a reasonable request that would accommodate the many people with visual disabilities who pay BarBri to help them prepare for bar exams, and would not be an undue burden for Defendant or alter the nature of its services. BarBri has ample resources to provide these relatively simple
12

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 13 of 22 PageID 13
auxiliary aids and services. In the end, BarBri’s unequal and inferior test preparation services caused Claire to score below her sighted peers and be unable to pass the bar exam.
49. On July 29, 2015, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs emailed and sent a letter on Claire’s behalf to BarBri informing the company about these accessibility issues and asking BarBri to respond by August 10, 2015. But BarBri ignored the letter and has still refused to respond.
50. Plaintiffs and many other blind law students will be taking Defendant’s bar review course for the July 2016 bar exam, and they will encounter the same accessibility barriers that BarBri has refused to address or remove.
CLASS ALLEGATIONS 51. Plaintiffs seek certification of the following Class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), 23(b)(2) and/or 23(b)(3): “all legally blind individuals who, on or after April 25, 2014, have taken or will take a BarBri bar review course at a time when BarBri’s website, mobile application, or other course materials was or is not fully accessible to legally blind students.”
Impracticability of Joinder 52. The persons in the class are so numerous that joinder of all such persons is impractical and the disposition of their claims in a class action is a benefit to the parties and to the Court. Upon information and belief, dozens to hundreds of legally blind individuals are part of the proposed class, and the members of the class are geographically dispersed throughout the United States.
13

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 14 of 22 PageID 14
Commonality 53. This case arises out of Defendants’ common policy and/or practice of denying blind persons full and equal access to the goods and services of BarBri’s bar review course, since parts of its website, mobile application, and course materials are inaccessible to blind persons. 54. The central question in this case concerns whether BarBri’s bar review course violated the ADA and Chapter 121 by failing to provide proper auxiliary aids and services, make reasonable accommodations, and maintaining a policy and practice of failing to make its course materials accessible to blind students. Because the same type of course materials are used in all jurisdictions, the answer to these legal questions will produce common answers for all class members. 55. Plaintiffs’ claims raise subsidiary common questions that will also have common answers for each class member, including whether BarBri maintains a place of public accommodation under the ADA or a public facility under Chapter 121, and whether BarBri’s course materials were inaccessible to blind students.
Typicality 56. The claims of the named plaintiffs are typical of those of the proposed Class. Plaintiffs challenge a single policy by which BarBri provided inaccessible course materials to students throughout the United States. Plaintiff Stanley experienced the type of accessibility under BarBri’s uniform course materials that other legally blind students experienced, and Plaintiffs Manners and Stewart will experience the same type of accessibility under BarBri’s uniform course materials that other legally blind students will experience in applying for the July 2016 bar exam, as well as future bar exams.
14

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 15 of 22 PageID 15
57. The relief sought in this action primarily consists of a declaration that BarBri violated the rights of Plaintiffs Stanley, Manners, and Stewart, and all of the other members of the class under the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code, an order requiring BarBri to make its course materials accessible to legally blind students, and an order requiring BarBri to uniformly compensate students who have been subjected to BarBri’s inaccessible course materials.
Adequacy 58. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the members of the Class. Plaintiffs are aware of no conflict with any other member of the Class. Plaintiffs understand their obligations as class representatives, and have already undertaken steps to fulfil them, and are prepared to continue to fulfill their duties as class representatives. 59. Plaintiffs have retained and are represented by counsel competent and experienced in complex class action litigation, including class actions brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Texas state law requiring full and equal access for people with disabilities.
Rule 23(b)(2) 60. This action is maintainable as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) because Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, making appropriate both declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to Plaintiffs and the Class as a whole. 61. Barbri has violated the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code in the same manner as to all members of the Class by failing to provide legally blind students with a fully
15

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 16 of 22 PageID 16
accessible web site, mobile application, and course materials. As such, BarBri has acted or refused to act on ground generally applicable to the Class.
62. Plaintiffs seek monetary relief that is incidental to the declaratory relief that Plaintiffs seek in this action. Specifically, Plaintiffs seek a refund of their Bar Bri registration fees, which can easily be determined, and $300 of monetary relief for each class member, the presumptive figure of monetary relief that is provided for under the Texas Human Resources Code. Because Plaintiffs seek identical amounts of monetary damages for all class members, the monetary relief in this action may be calculated in a simple, objective, and mechanical manner.
Rule 23(b)(3) 63. Alternatively, class certification is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) because questions of law and fact common to Class members predominate over questions affecting only individual class members, and because a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this litigation. 64. By resolving the common legal and factual questions identified above in a single class proceeding, each member of the class will receive a determination of whether BarBri violated his or her rights under the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code. These questions predominate over the few, if any, issues that may affect individual class members. 65. Upon information and belief, there are no other pending lawsuits in which similar members of the Class have raised similar allegations against BarBri. 66. It is desirable to concentrate the litigation of the claims in this particular forum, as BarBri’s corporate headquarters are in this District, and as BarBri’s website states that all claims against BarBri should be brought in this District. 67. There are no difficulties in managing this case as a class action.
16

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 17 of 22 PageID 17
68. References to Plaintiffs shall be deemed to include the named Plaintiffs and each member of the class, unless otherwise indicated.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF Violations of the ADA
69. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as though fully set forth herein.
70. On July 12, 1990, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act “to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1) .
71. Title III of the ADA states that “[n]o individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any public place of accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).
72. Plaintiffs are all blind and therefore qualified individuals with disabilities within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12102, et seq.
73. Defendant Barbri leases and/or owns lecture halls and offices around the country in which it offers its in-person lectures, and owns and operates its web site and mobile application. It further entered into contracts to provide services to Plaintiffs as customers. Thus, it is a “place of public accommodation” within the meaning of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(D).
74. Defendant BarBri is a “private entity who owns, leases, (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation,” and therefore has an obligation to comply with Title III of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).
17

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 18 of 22 PageID 18
75. The benefits provided by BarBri’s website and mobile app, including the MPQ question sets, Essay Architect, and Conviser Mini Review, are goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations of BarBri.
76. By refusing to provide an inaccessible website, mobile app, and course materials, BarBri denies blind students full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations that BarBri makes available to its sighted customers. Accordingly, BarBri is systematically violating the ADA by denying blind customers the benefits of access to or the full and equal enjoyment of its website, mobile app, course materials, and other bar review services.
77. BarBri’s violations are ongoing and continue to deny accessibility to blind students who use or wish to use BarBri’s bar review services to study for a bar exam.
78. Under Title III of the ADA, Defendant is committing discrimination by failing: to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities; and to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii) and (iii).
79. By refusing to modify its website, mobile app, and course materials, even when Plaintiffs have made reasonable requests and have lodged complaints, and it would not be an undue burden for BarBri or alter the nature of its services, BarBri has denied Plaintiffs and continues to deny Plaintiffs, on the basis of their disability, the same access to BarBri’s goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations as the access provided to individuals without disabilities.
18

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 19 of 22 PageID 19
Violations of Chapter 121 80. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as though fully set forth herein. 81. The policy of Texas “is to encourage and enable persons with disabilities to participate in the social and economic life of the state, to achieve maximum personal independence, to become gainfully employed, and to otherwise fully enjoy all public facilities within the state.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.001. 82. BarBri’s bar review services, including its website, mobile application, and course materials are an integral part of the bar review services. BarBri is a public accommodation under the ADA and a commercial establishment operating in Texas, and thus a public facility for purposes of Chapter 121. 83. Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.002. Chapter 121 requires that public facilities must make “reasonable accommodations in policies, practices, procedures.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code 121.003(d)(2). Defendant has failed to make reasonable accommodations in its policies, practices, and procedures for Plaintiffs and other students who have visual disabilities to properly use their bar exam preparation materials in the same way it allows sighted students to do so. 84. Chapter 121 also requires BarBri to “provide auxiliary aids and services necessary to allow the full use and enjoyment” of its services. Tex. Hum. Res. Code Ann. 121.003(d)(3). Defendant has refused to provide a website, app, or course materials that are fully accessible to Plaintiffs’ screen readers, or other auxiliary aids necessary to allow them effective communication, equivalent services, or the full use and enjoyment of Defendant’s bar exam preparation services.
19

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 20 of 22 PageID 20
85. “Persons with disabilities have the same right as the able-bodied to the full use and enjoyment of any public facility in the state.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.003(a). By failing to ensure that its bar review services, including its website, mobile application, and course materials, are accessible to people with disabilities, including blind persons, and by failing to address the concerns of blind students who informed BarBri that its website, mobile application, and parts of its course materials were not accessible to blind persons, BarBri has denied customers with disabilities the full use and enjoyment of its bar examination prep course.
RELIEF REQUESTED Declaratory Relief
86. Plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory judgment specifying the rights of individuals with disabilities to access BarBri’s services and Defendant's violations of the law.
Injunctive Relief 87. Plaintiffs will continue to experience unlawful discrimination as a result of Defendant’s refusal to comply with the ADA and Chapter 121. Injunctive relief is necessary so Plaintiffs and all individuals with disabilities can enjoy BarBri and its services to the same extent as those without disabilities as required by law, and to require Defendant to modify, develop, and follow proper programs, policies, procedures, and training for accommodating people who have visual disabilities, including Plaintiffs.
Damages 88. Each of the named Plaintiffs and each of the putative Class Members is entitled to a minimum of $300 per violation of the statute under Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.004. There is no statutory limit to this penalty.
20

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 21 of 22 PageID 21

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

89. Plaintiffs are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and court

costs, pursuant to the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12205, and the Texas Declaratory Judgments Act.

JURY REQUEST

90. Plaintiffs respectfully demand a jury trial pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

A. Declare that BarBri has violated the ADA and Chapter 121;

B. Permanently enjoin BarBri from violating the ADA and Chapter 121 ;

C. Certify the proposed Class;

D. Require BarBri to pay at least $300 to each member of the Class for the harms they suffered,

or will suffer, due to BarBri’s violations of the ADA and Chapter 121;

E. Award Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and

F. Issue any further relief as the court may deem appropriate.

Dated: April 25, 2016

Respectfully Submitted,

_/s/ Wayne Krause Yang Wayne Krause Yang State Bar No. 24032644 Abigail Frank State Bar No. 24069732 Hani Mirza State Bar No. 24083512

TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT 501 Elm Street, Ste. #450 Dallas, Texas 75202
(972) 333-9200 (phone) (512) 474-0726 (fax)

COUNSEL FOR INDIVIDUAL PLAINTIFFS 21

Case 3:16-cv-01113-O Document 1 Filed 04/25/16 Page 22 of 22 PageID 22 Matthew K. Handley Deepinder K. Goraya WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS 11 Dupont Circle, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000 (phone) (202) 319-1010 (fax) COUNSEL FOR ALL PLAINTIFFS
22

 </s> Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 1 of 28 PageID 99

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION

CLAIRE STANLEY, DEREK MANNERS, §

and CHRISTOPHER STEWART, on behalf §

of themselves and all others similarly

§

situated,

§

Plaintiffs, §

v.

§

§

BARBRI, INC. aka BARBRI BAR

§

REVIEW,

§

Defendant. §

Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-01113-O JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, and Christopher Stewart respectfully file this

First Amended Complaint on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated blind law students

against Defendant BarBri, Inc., which enrolled them in bar review courses to study for the bar

examination, but refused to remove several accessibility barriers to the services Barbri, Inc.

provides to its students, including accessibility barriers to its mobile application, website, and

course materials, thereby leaving them with inferior preparation services, preventing them from

effectively preparing for their bar exams and denying them the full and equal enjoyment of Barbri,

Inc. In support of their Complaint, Plaintiffs state as follows:

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

1. Defendant BarBri, Inc., aka BarBri Bar Review (“BarBri”), by far the largest bar

preparation course in the country, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12182,

et seq. (“ADA”), and Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code., Tex. Hum. Res. Code §

121.001, et seq. (“Chapter 121”) by maintaining barriers to the accessibility of its services for blind

students who use talking screen reading software and failing to make reasonable accommodations

1

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 2 of 28 PageID 100
or provide auxiliary aids or services, and thus unnecessarily hindering blind students from entering the legal field by preventing them from fully, equally, and adequately preparing for the bar exam.
2. In this putative class action lawsuit, Plaintiffs seek an order requiring BarBri to provide bar examination preparation services that are accessible to blind students, so that they can enjoy full and equal access to BarBri’s bar review services, which include the website and mobile application that BarBri uses to prepare students for the bar exam. This action also seeks compensation for blind students who signed up for and relied on BarBri’s review services to study for their bar exams, but found these services to be inaccessible to them and other blind students.
3. All three named Plaintiffs are blind individuals who used and/or are currently using BarBri’s bar review course to study for a bar exam, but encountered or are currently encountering significant accessibility barriers to BarBri’s website, http://www.barbri.com, and mobile application (BarBri App (v1.5.1)). In this action, Plaintiffs seek to redress the injuries they have suffered or will suffer if BarBri is allowed to continue to discriminate against blind students in violation of federal and state law.
JURISDICTION 4. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(4), because Plaintiffs assert a federal civil rights claim under the federal ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ Texas state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant, including general jurisdiction, as Defendants’ corporate headquarters are located in this District. 6. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), as both Defendants reside in this district, where their corporate headquarters are located. Venue is also
2

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 3 of 28 PageID 101
proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the federal and state claims occurred in this district. In addition, the terms and conditions on BarBri’s website state that students who wish to assert legal claims against BarBri should bring those claims in this federal district.
PARTIES 7. Plaintiff Claire Stanley is a resident of Silver Spring, Maryland and took the Pennsylvania bar exam in July 2015. As she did not pass, she plans to take the bar exam again in July 2016. She is currently enrolled in the BarBri course. Claire is blind and uses the Job Access With Speech (“JAWS”) screen reader on her computer to access and review materials on the Internet. She also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver (a talking screen reader for all Apple Products) to access all of the menus and applications on her phone. 8. Claire became interested in advocacy for herself and others beginning in high school, when she became involved with the National Youth Leadership Network, a youth-led and youth-driven national non-profit organization to promote youth leadership and education. It is a national voice for young leaders with disabilities. Claire was even selected to travel to attend a NYLN conference. 9. From then on, Claire knew that she wanted to be a lawyer, and majored in political science in college. She applied to attend law school during college and was delighted to begin law school after her graduation. 10. Claire realized that she wanted to practice disability rights law or general civil rights law, and never strayed from this goal during law school. She held internships at various civil rights and disability rights organizations and federal agencies, including at the Department of Justice, Disability Rights Section.
3

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 4 of 28 PageID 102
11. Claire is now a fellow at the federally mandated protection and advocacy agency for the rights of people with disabilities in Washington DC, University Legal Services. Once she is able to pass the bar, she will finally be able to fully represent her clients and achieve her goal of being a civil rights attorney.
12. Plaintiff Derek Manners recently graduated from Harvard Law School in May of 2016 and plans to take the bar exam in July 2016. He is currently enrolled in the BarBri course. Manners is blind and uses JAWS on his computer to access and review materials on the Internet. He also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver to access all of the menus and applications on his phone.
13. Derek was curious about being an attorney from a young age. His interest in the connection between policy and the law inspired him to join the debate team in high school.
14. In college at the University of Texas, he majored in political science and economics, and knew he wanted to practice political law.
15. During law school, Derek interned at the Office of the Connecticut Attorney General, where he investigated a Wall Street bank that was heavily involved in the mortgage security crisis.
16. Derek also served as the Legislative Director for the National Federation of the Blind (a civil rights advocacy group led by and consisting of blind individuals from around the country) of Massachusetts, where he monitored legislation at the state level that affected persons with disabilities, was the point person for coordinating meetings with members of Congress in Massachusetts, and mobilized NFB of Massachusetts membership for social media campaigns.
17. Derek is working part-time at the National Federation of the Blind in its Governmental Affairs Office, and will be starting a job at the firm of Allen & Overy (practicing
4

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 5 of 28 PageID 103
political law) in the fall. He will need to pass the bar in order to achieve his goal of practicing political law.
18. Plaintiff Christopher Stewart recently graduated from the University of Kentucky College of Law and plans to take the bar exam in July 2016. He is currently enrolled in the BarBri course. Stuart is blind and uses JAWS on his computer to access and review materials on the Internet. He also uses an iPhone with VoiceOver to access all of the menus and applications on his phone.
19. Christopher always had an interest in government and political science, as well as the law. His passion for social justice dates back to elementary school, when he first read To Kill a Mockingbird. It remains one of his favorite novels.
20. As an undergraduate, he majored in violin performance and worked as a professional violinist for a few years. But his passion for law drove him to attend law school.
21. During law school, Christopher worked for the Kentucky attorney general, where he was involved in researching how new EPA regulations under the Clean Air Act impact the state. This issue is now being litigated by attorneys general from over a dozen states.
22. Christopher also worked for one of Kentucky's leading trial lawyers, where he prepared pleadings, motions, and briefs for cases involving issues as diverse as medical malpractice, qui tam/False Claims Act actions, and aircraft mechanical negligence.
23. In addition, he served as president of his law school's Election Law Society and was an editor of his school's flagship law review for two years. Christopher also served as Legislative Director for the National Federation of the Blind of Kentucky. His duties included meeting with representatives of Kentucky’s entire congressional delegation, advocating for
5

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 6 of 28 PageID 104
specific issues important to blind individuals in Kentucky and nationally, participating in face-toface meetings, making phone calls, and coordinating letter writing campaigns.
24. Christopher will serve as a federal law clerk in the fall. Following his term, he hopes to practice employment law, and would like to work on the defense side, helping companies create an ADA accessibility plan and favorably resolve claims of discrimination.
25. Christopher recently got married and hopes to pass the bar before beginning his clerkship.
26. Defendant Barbri, Inc., aka BarBri Bar Review, is a company that sells and provides to students a bar exam preparation course, which includes online and in-person lectures and course material.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 27. For sighted and blind people, the Internet is a significant source of information and education, and offers a wealth of information, services, and products with instant availability and without the need to travel. For students, the Internet has become a critical and necessary tool for learning, studying, and preparing for examinations, especially for students who study for the bar exam in jurisdictions across America. In many places of higher education in America, the Internet is the exclusive or primary means by which students learn and interact with their teachers and classmates. 28. Like other educational institutions and exam preparation courses that have increased their reliance on the Internet to teach, inform, and evaluate students, BarBri has significantly increased its use of Internet-based resources to enhance and facilitate its traditional bar exam preparation courses. For example, BarBri offers an online live chat feature to connect students with tutors, an online planner, online practice questions and study outlines, online lecture
6

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 7 of 28 PageID 105
notes, and online lecture videos. Upon information and belief, by harnessing the power of the Internet to teach its bar examination courses, BarBri has reduced its costs per student and increased its ability to earn revenue and profit from its bar review courses.
29. Blind individuals access the Internet from computers by using screen access software, which vocalizes visual information on a computer screen or displays the content on a refreshable Braille display. This software represents the only method by which blind Americans can independently access the Internet and related computer programs. Without screen reading software and proper coding of a web site and mobile application to function with this software, blind persons cannot fully access the information, services, and products that companies like BarBri provide through the Internet.
30. Several screen access software programs are available to blind users of Windows and Apple operating system-enabled computers and devices. The most popular screen access software for a Windows computer is Job Access With Speech (“JAWS”), which must be purchased and installed separately. For Apple users, the only screen access software is VoiceOver, which is built into all Apple products. While each software program may have differences in how the user operates the software, each program requires information on the Internet to be capable of being rendered into text so that blind computer users may access it.
31. Like most law students, all three plaintiffs knew they would have to take a bar prep course to pass the bar. So, before graduating from law school, they all entered into agreements to take BarBri’s bar exam course and relied on BarBri’s resources to prepare them to take and pass the bar examination.
32. All three plaintiffs requested reasonable accommodations from BarBri well before the course began, and BarBri assured them that its bar review courses would be fully accessible to
7

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 8 of 28 PageID 106
them and would provide them with preparation equivalent to sighted students to take their bar exam.
33. Defendant’s website and mobile application provide practice questions to help students prepare for the Multistate Bar Exam (“MBE”), which is a one-day multiple choice test that all students must take to pass the bar exam in any state (with the exception of Louisiana).
34. BarBri’s website and mobile application provide real-time feedback to students on essay topics and MBEs, and offer many other features to help students study for and prepare for taking the bar examination in July or February of each year. BarBri’s website and mobile application are used extensively and regularly nationwide, including in the state of Texas. BarBri uses its web site and app to grade and rank students against themselves, monitor their own progress, and to receive assignments tailored to their own level of progression.
35. According to its website, www.thebarbrigroup.com/the-new-barbri/bar-review, BarBri is the “only course available to students in all fifty states... With significant cost of law school education and so much at stake, it makes sense for law students to choose a proven partner and support system they can count on to teach what they need to know to pass the bar exam, the first time. BarBri has become synonymous with bar prep success,” and has become the “#1 most trusted” bar review course in the United States.
36. Also on its website, www.barbri.com/bar-review-course, BarBri specifically advertises its web site and mobile application as part of its innovative course which offers the best possible learning experience “in class, online and mobile.” BarBri highlights its online personal study plan, noting that “The easy-to-use online Personal Study Plan is your daily to-do list during the BARBRI Bar Review course. It continually monitors your progress and automatically recommends assignments aligned to your unique areas of need . . . . Your Personal Study Plan
8

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 9 of 28 PageID 107
analyzes more than 1,000 points of data collected from your assignments, grades, practice exams and practice essays. This helps you hone in and improve on areas of law that need the most attention.”
37. BarBri highlights other online components as part of its innovative learning course, such as the online Essay Architect: “The online Essay Architect tool provides immediate feedback for higher scoring essays. It enhances your ability to write the lawyer-like answers that the bar examiners are looking for on the bar exam . . . . Using drag-and-drop features, you build your practice essay following the standard IRAC format. Immediate feedback reinforces organization and structure.”
38. BarBri’s Simulated MBE with Pass Predictor component is advertised on BarBri’s web site as by far, the “best predictor of bar exam success.” “Our realistic 200-question Simulated MBE compares your test results with other BARBRI students - the largest, most statistically valid group of bar exam takers nationwide. “BarBri prepares students to take the bar examination in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Every jurisdiction except for Louisiana administers and relies upon the results of the MBE, which is a 200-question multiple-choice examination that the National Conference of Bar Examiners developed. In addition to requiring students to take the MBE, jurisdictions require students to answer a variety of essay questions in narrative form and state-specific multiple choice questions to evaluate their legal analysis and writing skills. BarBri’s courses and materials prepare students to master all portions of the relevant state bar exam, score as high as possible on the exam, and pass the exam. In the jurisdictions where students take the MBE, BarBri uses “MPQ Question Sets” for students to review and answer questions that are the same or similar to the questions that will be asked in the MBE during the bar exam.
9

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 10 of 28 PageID 108
39. It is very important for students to score as high as possible on the MBE, because in most jurisdictions the MBE provides students with the largest – or one of the largest – opportunities to earn points that are needed to meet the minimum point threshold for passing the bar exam in the relevant jurisdiction. In addition, some jurisdictions will only allow lawyers who have already been admitted to another jurisdiction to waive into their state bars if they previously obtained a specific MBE score during a prior bar exam. Thus, even if a student has passed the bar exam in a jurisdiction, such as Texas, he or she may not automatically be able to become a member of another jurisdiction, such as the District of Columbia, if his or her MBE score on the prior bar exam did not meet a certain threshold. Instead, he or she would have to take a new bar exam, and would likely incur further expenses and time to prepare to take the bar exam again.
40. One key component of BarBri is “BARBRI AMP.” BarBri states that “BARBRI AMP is a highly effective way to master the black letter law and maximize your MBE score. It's built right into your Personal Study Plan — only when you need it based on assessments of your bar study progress. BARBRI AMP employs interactive software techniques used by video game developers to keep you engaged, motivated and focused. It quickly assesses your level of knowledge and confidence in core areas of law, then focuses your attention where you need additional study. BARBRI AMP monitors your aptitude in real time and instantly configures follow-up questions until you’ve demonstrated a solid grasp of a concept. No other legal study aid does this.”
41. Blind students of BarBri cannot use this online component due to its inaccessibility, and thus cannot take advantage of BarBri’s real-time grading, ranking, and individualized progression of study.
10

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 11 of 28 PageID 109
42. On BarBri’s main page, www.barbri.com, there is a link to a web page entitled “ADA ACCOMMODATION,” which states that “BarBri complies with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) and provides appropriate auxiliary aids and services to students with disabilities to ensure effective communication.” BarBri was displaying the same statement on its website during the time that each of the Plaintiffs enrolled in BarBri’s bar review course and at the time that Claire was preparing to take the bar exam last year. BarBri’s enrollment form is used nationwide and also states that, “BarBri complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and provides appropriate auxiliary aids and services to students with disabilities.”
43. However, upon information and belief, the auxiliary aids and services that BarBri provides are not appropriate, as they do not ensure equivalent effective communication with its blind students and sighted students.
44. On the same page that BarBri promises that it complies with the ADA, BarBri states that “practice testing” is one of the “three main components of the BARBRI course,” in addition to “lectures” and “substantive law outlines.” BarBri’s website further states that “The BARBRI course is different from law school courses. It is extremely condensed and requires you to blend the three components above to bring you to peak performance for your bar exam.” BarBri’s practice testing primarily occurs on the BARBRI website, www.barbri.com. Accordingly, BarBri is and has been fully aware that students with disabilities, including blind students, need to be able to fully access BarBri’s website to engage in the practice testing that is a critical and necessary part of preparing for the bar exam.
45. When Claire was studying for the bar exam in the summer of 2015, BarBri’s website identified an ADA Manager to whom students with disabilities should direct inquiries about BarBri’s compliance with the ADA and/or requests for reasonable accommodations: ADA
11

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 12 of 28 PageID 110
Director, BARBRI Bar Review, 200 W. Adams, Suite 250, Chicago, IL 60606, Fax: (312) 2884607, ADARequests@BARBRI.com.
46. Prior to commencing her bar review course in 2015, Claire contacted BarBri’s former National ADA Director, Kate Levine, and requested that her textbooks, lecture notes, and handouts be provided to her in an electronic format so that she could access them. Defendant’s employee, Ms. Levine, assured Claire that it would provide these materials in an accessible format.
47. Prior to commencing the 2016 bar review course, Derek and Christopher also contacted Defendant’s current national ADA manager to request materials for the July 2016 bar review course in an alternate format, and Defendant assured them that they would be made accessible.
48. While Claire studied for the July 2015 bar exam, BarBri’s website contained accessibility barriers preventing Claire from accessing it, including the “MPQ Question Sets” in the StudySmart section that allows students to engage in practice testing for the MBE. While Defendant’s website allowed Claire to read the text of the questions, it prevented her from reading the answer choices, as they appeared in an inaccessible flash window.
49. Claire attended the live lectures throughout her bar review course last summer in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The lecturers often referred her to online components of the BarBri course, such as submitting practice test answers online, following the BarBri’s online planner for daily assignments, and receiving personalized assignments online based on their individualized test results. One lecturer who referenced this specifically was Dale Larrimore, one of the BarBri Regional Directors. However, the online planner, practice tests with real-time scoring, and other components referenced by the lectures were and are not now fully accessible to blind students.
12

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 13 of 28 PageID 111
50. Claire also recalls that students were allowed to attend the BarBri in-person lectures anywhere in the country and at any time, so long as they showed their BarBri ID badge.
51. Chris also attended in-person BarBri lectures at his law school, and recalls that the handouts which the students are required to fill in during the lectures were provided on the BarBri mobile application. Chris and the other two Plaintiffs are not fully able to access the application with their iPhones.
52. Derek listens to the lectures online, but is aware that for many who attend the lectures in person, BarBri simply plays a video of the live lecture in the classroom, and makes the same references described above to the online components of the BarBri course.
53. Defendant has also failed to make the answer choices of the MPQ question sets accessible. BarBri instructs students to first read the “call of the question” before reading the question itself. Yet, the accessibility barriers prevent them from doing so by keeping them from first reading the answer choices before scrolling back up and reading the question itself. Because Defendant is, in effect, forcing the plaintiffs to read the question and answer choices in chronological order without pause, they are not able to take the practice in the manner BarBri advises its customers.
54. BarBri further proclaims that the “Essay Architect” feature of its website will help students write better essays for bar exams. Students using Essay Architect must rearrange phrases in a pre-written essay to organize them in the proper format, and this is done by dragging and dropping the phrases. They receive feedback in the margins about their formatting. Defendant does not provide this feature to Plaintiffs, as it does not make the drag-and-drop function accessible to their screen readers. BarBri has also failed to allow Plaintiffs to detect that certain phrases relating to the area of law covered by the essay are highlighted with their screen readers, thereby
13

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 14 of 28 PageID 112
preventing them from receiving the vital feedback on essay construction that they need and that all of their sighted peers were and are now receiving.
55. Defendant has also failed to make the same features on its website accessible to Plaintiffs when they used BarBri’s iOS mobile application, thereby preventing them from studying anywhere and at any time. Thus, Defendant has effectively denied the use of this significant feature of the bar review course which it advertises.
56. Defendant has also failed to remove accessibility barriers to BarBri’s electronic versions of the books and lecture handouts. The PDF versions of books and handouts do not contain page numbers detectable by JAWS, and the Microsoft Word versions of the same documents did not provide indicia of the page numbers corresponding to the PDF and hard copy versions. BarBri unnecessarily makes it difficult for Plaintiffs to locate certain sections of the textbooks specified in lectures or in the planner.
57. Furthermore, in the summer of 2015, Defendant printed the Braille version of its Conviser “mini review” with inaccurate use of Braille italics indicators. This “mini review” is an important book that provides an outline of the materials that students are required to use in preparing for the bar exam. BarBri placed Dots 4-6 Braille italics symbols in front of each word in an italicized portion, instead of proper brailling, which would have these symbols at the beginning and end of an entire portion of the text, not in front of each word. In doing so, Defendant made it extremely and unnecessarily difficult for Claire to read the mini review in 2015.
58. Claire complained to BarBri’s National ADA Director in 2015 about these accessibility barriers and requested that they be removed, but BarBri did not take any action to modify or fix the inaccessible features on its website or app, and did not take any action to address the accessibility issues with BarBri’s books and lectures, even though removing these barriers is a
14

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 15 of 28 PageID 113
reasonable request that would accommodate the many people with visual disabilities who pay BarBri to help them prepare for bar exams, would not be an undue burden for Defendant, or alter the nature of its services. BarBri has ample resources to provide these relatively simple auxiliary aids and services. In the end, BarBri’s unequal and inferior test preparation services caused Claire to score below her sighted peers and be unable to pass the 2015 bar exam.
59. On July 29, 2015, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs emailed and sent a letter on Claire’s behalf to BarBri informing the company about these accessibility issues and asking BarBri to respond by August 10, 2015. However, BarBri ignored the letter and has still refused to respond.
60. Plaintiffs and many other blind law students are taking Defendant’s bar review course for the July 2016 bar exam, and they are encountering and will encounter the same accessibility barriers that BarBri has refused to address or remove.
61. Plaintiffs have had the following additional issues thus far while taking the 2016 course:
• The radio buttons for the answer choices on the “MPQ Question Sets” in the StudySmart component are not accessible.
• Plaintiffs are not able to speed up, slow down, or jump around lectures on BarBri’s web site or mobile application, as users not using screen readers are able to do.
• For general lectures, Plaintiffs are not able to exit from the online player and then re-open the player and begin the lecture where they left off. Sighted students can easily pause, rewind, fast-forward, and exit lectures without losing their place.
15

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 16 of 28 PageID 114
• Plaintiff, Christopher Stewart, has had many lectures for which Defendant did not provide corresponding accessible handouts on time. There were days when Christopher had to listen to lectures for which he did not receive the handouts, and this put him days behind where he should have been in his study. Claire faced a similar situation last time she used Defendant’s services. BarBri still has not provided Christopher with a handout for his Transactions course lecture.
• BarBri also failed to provide Christopher with timely accessible outlines for his state-specific distinction lessons on time. He needed these outlines as he progressed from one lesson to the next. However, BarBri provided them late, and all at once, making him fall further behind in his studying for the bar.
• BarBri also provides students a percentile rank after every practice test. BarBri tells students to monitor progress while studying for the bar exam by using the percentile rank graphs featured on BarBri’s website. However, the percentile rank feature is not accessible to Plaintiffs. Furthermore, BarBri does not allow Plaintiffs to self-grade essays online, which is a feature it offers sighted individuals.
• BarBri’s website contains combo boxes (which are the dropdown menus) for its online planner and other components that are not fully accessible.
• Plaintiffs are not able to access the pop-up notifications on BarBri’s website, despite BarBri’s warnings that the notifications are important for students to read.
• Plaintiffs cannot access dates beyond the current week on BarBri’s online assignment calendar.
16

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 17 of 28 PageID 115
• Plaintiffs are not able to self-grade their essays, because they cannot submit them online, as the Essay Architect component remains inaccessible.
• Rather than being able to receive, submit, and do assignments online, Plaintiffs must access BarBri’s materials through a One Drive folder, or on a flash drive sent via mail. Yet, even BarBri’s One Drive folder is inaccessible unless Plaintiffs use the Mozilla Firefox web browser. One would not know to utilize Firefox to access the One Drive folder unless discovering this by trial and error. BarBri’s One Drive folder should be accessible with all web browsers that operate with screen readers.
62. Plaintiffs have fallen behind their class-mates due to these accessibility barriers and do not even know how they are performing relative to their sighted peers. They fear that they will not be able to pass the bar exam this year.
63. Defendant’s accessibility barriers still persist today, which Plaintiffs are experiencing while preparing for the July 2016 exam.
64. Due to BarBri’s failure to remove these accessibility barriers, Claire has been forced to hire a tutor through BarBri, and was charged extra for the tutor.
CLASS ALLEGATIONS 65. Plaintiffs seek certification of the following Class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), 23(b)(2) and/or 23(b)(3): “All legally blind individuals nationwide who, on or after April 25, 2014, took, plan to take or attempted to take a BarBri bar review course at a time when BarBri’s website, mobile application, or other course materials was or is not fully accessible to legally blind students, or who have been discouraged from taking the BarBri bar review course due to such inaccessibility.”
17

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 18 of 28 PageID 116
Impracticability of Joinder 66. The persons in the class are so numerous that joinder of all such persons is impractical and the disposition of their claims in a class action is a benefit to the parties and to the Court. Upon information and belief, dozens to hundreds of legally blind individuals are part of the proposed class, and the members of the class are geographically dispersed throughout the United States.
Commonality 67. This case arises out of Defendants’ common policy and/or practice of denying blind persons full and equal access to the goods and services of BarBri’s bar review course, since parts of its website, mobile application, and course materials are inaccessible to blind persons. 68. The central question in this case concerns whether BarBri’s bar review course violated the ADA and Chapter 121 by failing to provide proper auxiliary aids and services, make reasonable accommodations, and maintaining a policy and practice of failing to make its course materials accessible to blind students. Because the same type of course materials are used in all jurisdictions, the answer to these legal questions will produce common answers for all class members. 69. Plaintiffs’ claims raise subsidiary common questions that will also have common answers for each class member, including whether BarBri maintains a place of public accommodation under the ADA or a public facility under Chapter 121, whether it constitutes a private entity which offers a course related to licensing for professional purposes and whether BarBri’s course materials were inaccessible to blind students.
18

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 19 of 28 PageID 117
Typicality 70. The claims of the named plaintiffs are typical of those of the proposed Class. Plaintiffs challenge a single policy by which BarBri provided inaccessible course materials to students throughout the United States. Plaintiffs experienced the type of inaccessibility under BarBri’s uniform course materials that other legally blind students experienced. 71. The relief sought in this action primarily consists of a declaration that BarBri violated the rights of Plaintiffs Stanley, Manners, and Stewart, and all of the other members of the class under the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code, an order requiring BarBri to make its course materials accessible to legally blind students, and an order requiring BarBri to uniformly compensate students who have been subjected to BarBri’s inaccessible course materials.
Adequacy 72. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests of the members of the Class. Plaintiffs are aware of no conflict with any other member of the Class. Plaintiffs understand their obligations as class representatives, and have already undertaken steps to fulfil them, and are prepared to continue to fulfill their duties as class representatives. 73. Plaintiffs have retained and are represented by counsel competent and experienced in complex class action litigation, including class actions brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Texas state law requiring full and equal access for people with disabilities.
Rule 23(b)(2) 74. This action is maintainable as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) because Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the Class, making appropriate both declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to Plaintiffs and the Class as a whole.
19

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 20 of 28 PageID 118
75. Barbri has violated the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code in the same manner as to all members of the Class by failing to provide legally blind students with a fully accessible web site, mobile application, and course materials. As such, BarBri has acted or refused to act on ground generally applicable to the Class.
76. Plaintiffs seek monetary relief that is incidental to the declaratory relief that Plaintiffs seek in this action. Specifically, Plaintiffs seek a refund of their Bar Bri registration fees, which can easily be determined, and $300 of monetary relief for each class member, the presumptive figure of monetary relief that is provided for under the Texas Human Resources Code. Because Plaintiffs seek identical amounts of monetary damages for all class members, the monetary relief in this action may be calculated in a simple, objective, and mechanical manner.
Rule 23(b)(3) 77. Alternatively, class certification is appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) because questions of law and fact common to Class members predominate over questions affecting only individual class members, and because a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this litigation. 78. By resolving the common legal and factual questions identified above in a single class proceeding, each member of the class will receive a determination of whether BarBri violated his or her rights under the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code. These questions predominate over the few, if any, issues that may affect individual class members. 79. Upon information and belief, there are no other pending lawsuits in which similar members of the Class have raised similar allegations against BarBri.
20

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 21 of 28 PageID 119
80. It is desirable to concentrate the litigation of the claims in this particular forum, as BarBri’s corporate headquarters are in this District, and as BarBri’s website states that all claims against BarBri should be brought in this District.
81. There are no difficulties in managing this case as a class action. 82. References to Plaintiffs shall be deemed to include the named Plaintiffs and each member of the class, unless otherwise indicated.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF Violations of the ADA
83. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as though fully set forth herein.
84. On July 12, 1990, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act “to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1) .
85. Title III of the ADA states that “[n]o individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).
86. Plaintiffs are all legally blind and therefore qualified individuals with disabilities within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12102, et seq.
87. Defendant Barbri leases and/or owns lecture halls and offices around the country in which it offers its in-person lectures, either live or by video, and owns and operates its web site and mobile application. It further entered into contracts to provide services to Plaintiffs as customers.
21

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 22 of 28 PageID 120
88. BarBri is a “place of education” which is specifically included as a place of public accommodation in the twelve categories of Title III of the ADA. 28 C.F.R. 36.104(10) and operates “lecture halls”, which are also included as places of public accommodation in the twelve categories of Title III of the ADA. 28 C.F.R. 36.104(4). Thus, BarBri is a “private entity which owns, leases, (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation,” and therefore has an obligation to comply with Title III of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).
89. In order to receive the full benefit of the BarBri lectures, both in-person or online, students are required to, and are instructed to, use components of Barbri’s online course material, including using course outlines, taking and submitting on-line practice tests, taking on-line MPQ question sets, submitting essays, following the online calendar for assignments, and receiving personalized assignments based on an individual’s online practice test scores. Access to Barbri’s on-line course material is integral to full and equal enjoyment of its lecture halls and place of education.
90. The benefits provided by BarBri’s website and mobile app, including the MPQ question sets, Essay Architect, and Conviser Mini Review, are goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations of BarBri.
91. By refusing to provide an inaccessible website, mobile app, and course materials, BarBri denies blind students full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations, including its in-peson and online lectures, that BarBri makes available to its sighted customers. Accordingly, BarBri is systematically violating the ADA by denying blind customers the benefits of access to or the full and equal enjoyment of its website, mobile app, course materials, lectures, and other bar review services. This refusal also denies
22

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 23 of 28 PageID 121
Plaintiffs the opportunity to participate in programs or activities that are not separate or different from those without disabilities. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(D).
92. BarBri’s violations are ongoing and continue to deny accessibility to blind students who use or wish to use BarBri’s full bar review services to study for a bar exam.
93. Under Title III of the ADA, Defendant is also committing discrimination by failing to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities; and failing to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently than other individuals because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii) and (iii).
94. By refusing to modify its website, mobile app, and course materials, even when Plaintiffs have made reasonable requests and have lodged complaints, and when such modifications would not be an undue burden for BarBri and would not alter the nature of BarBri’s services, BarBri has denied Plaintiffs, and continues to deny Plaintiffs, on the basis of their disability, the same access to BarBri’s goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and/or accommodations as the access provided to individuals without disabilities.
95. A public accommodation is also required to furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities. 28 C.F.R. 36.303(c).
96. The term auxiliary aids and services includes screen reader software and accessible electronic and information technology, or other effective methods of making visually delivered materials available to individuals who are blind or have low vision. 28 C.F.R. 36.303(b)(2).
23

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 24 of 28 PageID 122
97. The auxiliary aid and service in this instance is screen reader software, and the coding and tagging on Barbri’s website and mobile application that is necessary for screen reader software, such as talking screen readers, to read and access the content. Such access is necessary to grant effective communication with BarBri’s blind students throughout the bar review course.
98. By failing to provide materials in a timely manner, providing materials in inaccessible formats, and preventing blind students from accessing all the online components of the bar review course with their screen readers by refusing to eliminate accessibility barriers, BarBri is denying Plaintiffs and other blind students effective communication.
99. BarBri is also a private entity which offers a course related to licensing for professional purposes. 28 C.F.R. 36.102(a)(3). Thus, it is covered by Title III of the ADA
100. Any course covered by this section must be modified to ensure that the place and manner in which the course is given are accessible. ADA Technical Assistance Manual, III.4.6200, available at www.ada.gov/taman3.html
101. This includes providing auxiliary aids or services, except where to do so would fundamentally alter the course or result in an undue burden.
102. BarBri has not shown that eliminating accessibility barriers to its web site or mobile application would constitute a fundamental alteration to its course or be an undue burden. BarBri is therefore required to ensure that its course is fully accessible.
Violations of Chapter 121 103. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing allegations as though fully set forth herein. 104. The policy of Texas “is to encourage and enable persons with disabilities to participate in the social and economic life of the state, to achieve maximum personal independence,
24

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 25 of 28 PageID 123
to become gainfully employed, and to otherwise fully enjoy all public facilities within the state.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.001.
105. BarBri’s bar review services, including its website, mobile application, and course materials are an integral part of the bar review services. BarBri is a public accommodation under the ADA and a commercial establishment operating in Texas, and thus a public facility for purposes of Chapter 121.
106. Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.002. Chapter 121 requires that public facilities must make “reasonable accommodations in policies, practices, procedures.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code 121.003(d)(2). Defendant has failed to make reasonable accommodations in its policies, practices, and procedures for Plaintiffs and other students who have visual disabilities to properly use their bar exam preparation materials in the same way it allows sighted students to do so.
107. Chapter 121 also requires BarBri to “provide auxiliary aids and services necessary to allow the full use and enjoyment” of its services. Tex. Hum. Res. Code Ann. 121.003(d)(3). Defendant has refused to provide a website, app, or course materials and components that are fully accessible to Plaintiffs’ screen readers, or other auxiliary aids necessary to allow them effective communication, equivalent services, or the full use and enjoyment of Defendant’s bar exam preparation services.
108. “Persons with disabilities have the same right as the able-bodied to the full use and enjoyment of any public facility in the state.” Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.003(a). By failing to ensure that its bar review services, including its website, mobile application, and course materials and components, are accessible to people with disabilities, including blind persons, and by failing to address the concerns of blind students who informed BarBri that its website, mobile application,
25

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 26 of 28 PageID 124
and parts of its course materials were not accessible to blind persons, BarBri has denied customers with disabilities the full use and enjoyment of its bar examination prep course.
RELIEF REQUESTED Declaratory Relief
109. Plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory judgment specifying the rights of individuals with disabilities to access BarBri’s services and Defendant's violations of the law.
Injunctive Relief 110. Plaintiffs will continue to experience unlawful discrimination as a result of Defendant’s refusal to comply with the ADA and Chapter 121. Injunctive relief is necessary so Plaintiffs and all individuals with disabilities can enjoy BarBri and its services to the same extent as those without disabilities as required by law, and to require Defendant to modify, develop, and follow proper programs, policies, procedures, and training for accommodating people who have visual disabilities, including Plaintiffs.
Damages 111. Each of the named Plaintiffs and each of the putative Class Members is entitled to a minimum of $300 per violation of the statute under Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.004. There is no statutory limit to this penalty.
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs 112. Plaintiffs are entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and court costs, pursuant to the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12205, and the Texas Declaratory Judgments Act.
JURY REQUEST 113. Plaintiffs respectfully demand a jury trial pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 38.
26

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 27 of 28 PageID 125

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:

A. Declare that BarBri has violated the ADA and Chapter 121;

B. Permanently enjoin BarBri from violating the ADA and Chapter 121 ;

C. Certify the proposed Class;

D. Require BarBri to pay at least $300 to each member of the Class for the harms they suffered,

or will suffer, due to BarBri’s violations of the ADA and Chapter 121;

E. Award Plaintiffs their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs; and

F. Issue any further relief as the court may deem appropriate.

Dated: July 19, 2016

Respectfully Submitted,

_/s/ Wayne Krause Yang__ Wayne Krause Yang State Bar No. 24032644 Abigail Frank State Bar No. 24069732 Hani Mirza State Bar No. 24083512

TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT 501 Elm Street, Ste. #450 Dallas, Texas 75202
(972) 333-9200 (phone) (512) 474-0726 (fax)

COUNSEL FOR INDIVIDUAL PLAINTIFFS

27

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 15 Filed 07/19/16 Page 28 of 28 PageID 126 _/s/ Matthew K. Handley__ Matthew K. Handley (admitted pro hac vice) Deepinder K. Goraya (admitted pro hac vice) WASHINGTON LAWYERS’ COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS 11 Dupont Circle, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000 (phone) (202) 319-1010 (fax) COUNSEL FOR ALL PLAINTIFFS
Certificate of Service This is to certify that on this 18th day of July, 2016, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, and using the electronic case filing system, I served all counsel of record electronically or by another manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2). _/s/ Matthew K. Handley__ Matthew K. Handley
28

 </s> Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 1 of 28 PageID 3213

In the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Dallas Division

Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, and §

Christopher Stewart, on behalf of §

themselves and all others similarly §

situated,

§

§

Plaintiffs, §

§

v.

§

§

Barbri, Inc. aka Barbri Bar Review, §

§

Defendant. §

Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-01113-BK

Consent Decree 1. Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, Christopher Stewart (collectively Plaintiffs) and
Barbri, Inc. (Barbri) (hereinafter collectively referred to as the Parties) have agreed to enter into this Consent Decree in order to fully and finally resolve Plaintiffs' individual claims advanced in the action captioned Stanley, et al. v. Barbri, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-01113-BK (Lawsuit). 2. Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1218112189 and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. pt. 36, prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any private entity that owns, leases (or leases to), or operates any place of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a); 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(a). Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code requires that all persons with disabilities

Consent Decree

Pagel

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 2 of 28 PageID 3214

shall have the same right as persons without disabilities to the full use and enjoyment of any public facility in the State of Texas. Tex. Hum. Res. Code § 121.003(a). 3. On May 24, 2016, Plaintiffs Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, and Christopher Stewart, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, commenced this civil action 3:16-CV-01113-BK in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas against Defendant Barbri, Inc., alleging discrimination in violation of the ADA, as well as in violation of Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code. In their First Amended Complaint, filed on July 19, 2016, Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, and damages. 4. Defendant Barbri, Inc. offers a bar review course for individuals preparing to take a bar exam to become licensed as attorneys. Barbri's bar review course includes a number of different components and learning tools, including in-person lectures, published print materials, a mobile application for Android and iOS tablets and smart phones, and online web applications available at a login portion of the website (esc. barbri.com). 5. Plaintiffs are blind individuals who use screen reading software or built-in screen reading capabilities on computers, smart phones or tablets to verbalize what is on the screen. 6. Plaintiffs allege in this lawsuit that they experienced accessibility barriers while participating in the Barbri bar review course. Plaintiffs specifically challenge the accessibility and usability of the login portion of Barbri's online course content at

Consent Decree

Page 2

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 3 of 28 PageID 3215
esc.barbri.com and accessibility of Barbri's mobile applications, which Plaintiffs allege are not compliant with the minimum criteria for web accessibility established by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines ("WCAG"). Plaintiffs also challenge the formatting and timeliness of information and written materials provided by Barbri in electronic, large print, or braille formats. 7. Barbri disputes and expressly denies Plaintiffs' allegations as set forth in Plaintiffs' Original and First Amended Complaint, denies that it has violated the ADA and its implementing regulations or Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code. Barbri further denies it is required to make the login portion of its website and its mobile applications conform to the WCAG 2.0 AA Success Criteria. Barbri denies that it has any liability to Plaintiffs and others similarly situated for any claim whatsoever. By entering into this Consent Decree, Barbri does n ot admit wrongdoing. Nothing in this Consent Decree shall be interpreted as an admission of liability by Barbri for violations of the ADA, Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code, or any other applicable federal, state, or local statutes or ordinances. 8. To avoid the uncertainty, time and expense that would accompany further litigation in this matter, Plaintiffs and Barbri have agreed to enter into this Consent Decree, which fully and finally resolves Plaintiffs' individual claims as set forth in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complain t on file in this Court and settles all actual and potential claims or litigation between Plaintiffs and Barbri.

Consent Decree

Page3

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 4 of 28 PageID 3216

9. The Parties have agreed to enter into this Consent Decree, which memorializes the injunctive relief obligations herein imposed on Barbri pursuant to a confidential Settlement Agreement entered into separately between the Parties. In consideration of the covenants and mutual promises and agreements contained herein, and other valuable consideration described fully in the Parties' confidential Settlement Agreement, the Parties agree to the terms and conditions contained below in this Consent Decree.
10. The resolution of the instant action as set forth in this Consent Decree and the confidential Settlement Agreement does not resolve or affect the individual claims of members of the putative class action other than Plaintiffs Stanley, Manners and Stewart. This action will be dismissed without class certification.

Jurisdiction 11. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28
U.S.C. § 1343(a)(4) because Plaintiffs assert a federal civil rights claim under § 12188(a) of the ADA. Barbri does not challenge this Court's exercise of personal jurisdiction over it. The Parties agree that venue is appropriate in this district. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce this Consent Decree. Agreed Resolution 12. Plaintiffs and Barbri agree that it is in all Parties' best interest to resolve this lawsuit on mutually agreeable terms without further litigation. Accordingly, the Parties agree to the entry of this Consent Decree without trial or further adjudication of any

Consent Decree

Page4

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 5 of 28 PageID 3217
issues of fact or law raised in Plaintiffs' Complaint. As indicated by the signatures below, the Parties agree to entry of this Consent Decree by this Court.
In resolution of this Action, the Parties hereby AGREE and the Court expressly APPROVES, ENTERS, AND ORDERS the following:
I. General Nondiscrimination Requirements 13. Pursuant to the terms of this Consent Decree, Barbri, during the term of this Consent
Decree: a. Shall not deny individuals with visual disabilities, including Plaintiffs, the
opportunity to participate in and benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided through the login portion of its online course (esc.barbri.com), its mobile applications, its in-person lectures and its print materials; b. Shall not provide individuals with visual disabilities, including Plaintiffs, an unequal opportunity to participate in or benefit from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided through the login portion of its online course (esc.barbri.com), its mobile applications, its inperson lectures and its print materials; and c. Shall take the necessary steps to ensure that individuals with visual disabilities, including Plaintiffs, are not excluded, denied services, segregated, or otherwise treated differently because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services, through

Consent Decree

PageS

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 6 of 28 PageID 3218

the login portion of its online course (esc.barbri.com), its mobile applications, its in-person lectures, and its print materials.
II. Compliance with Title III of the ADA Remediation of Website and Mobile Applications 14. According to the timeline set herein at Paragraph 19 below, Barbri will make usable
for screen reader users and visually impaired students those components, modules, tools, or web applications that existed during the Summer 2017 bar review course, including any replacements to these components, modules, tools and web applications, on the login portion of its bar review course (at esc.barbri.com) and on Barbri's mobile applications. For purposes of this Consent Decree, " usable'' is defined by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Level AA Success Criteria (WCAG) using four core principles of accessibility: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable, and Robust. l To meet the usable standard required under this Consent Decree, the user interaction and interface elements on the login portion of the website (at esc.barbri.com) and Barbri's m obile applications must meet these four core principles. For purposes of this Consent Decree, "replacement" refers to and includes any and all components, modules, tools, or web applications that replace in whole or in part the functionality and educational purpose of any tools, components, modules, or web applications that existed in Summer 2017 but that are removed from the bar review course during the period of the Consent Decree. If, at
I For an explanation of the definitions of these four core principles, see: h t t p : / / w w w . w 3 . or g / TR / 2 01 6/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20161007/complete. h t m l

Consent Decree

Page 6

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 7 of 28 PageID 3219

the end of the remediation period, technical violations of the WCAG 2.0 AA success criteria exist for certain components, tools, modules, or web applications on the login portion of the website (at esc.barbri.com) or on the mobile applications but such components, tools, modules, or web applications are nonetheless usable for screen reader users and other visually impaired students, such violations will not be regarded as failures to comply with this Consent Decree. 15. As part of this remediation obligation, Barbri agrees to make usable for screen reader users and the visually impaired all of the components, modules, tools and web applications present on the login portion of Barbri's bar review course and mobile applications that existed during the Summer 2017 bar review course, and any replacements to these components, modules, tools and web applications, including the following:
• Components of the Personal Study Plan, including the home page, My Assignments Page, My Progress Page, and Message Center page; Pages that allow for submitting essays or offline test answers; The login page at esc.barbri.com;
• The media player for streaming videos; • All practice question tools/web applications that were available during the
Summer 2017 course; and • Barbri's Essay Architect Tool. Barbri will also add audio descriptions to course videos that convey material content in a visual manner. Barbri may satisfy its remediation obligations by removing or replacing the identified accessibility barriers with alternative components, modules,

Consent Decree

Page7

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 8 of 28 PageID 3220

tools and/or web applications that are usable consistent with the WCAG standard set forth above. The specific tools, components, web applications and modules that must be remediated are identified fully in the separate confidential Settlement Agreement. 16. Barbri's remediation obligation under this Consent Decree does not include any components, tools, modules, or web applications that may be added to the login portion of the website or the mobile applications after Barbri's Summer 2017 bar review course, unless such components, tools, modules, or web applications replace the features or components listed above. 17. Barbri currently offers a dynamic assistive site (assistive.esc.barbri.com) hosted by Usablenet that provides the information available at esc.barbri.com on a platform that purports to conform to WCAG 2.0 AA Success Criteria. Until the remediation efforts can be completed within the timeline set forth in Paragraph 19 below, Barbri will require Usablenet to remediate any functions or features on the Usablenet assistive site that have been identified as out of conformance with the WCAG 2.0 AA Success Criteria before the first day of instruction for the Winter 2018 bar review course. Barbri will continue to use the Usablenet assistive site through the Summer 2018 course as an interim solution while remediations are developed for the login portion of Barbri's website (at esc.barbri.com). 18. After the remediation efforts have been completed according to the timeline set forth in Paragraph 19 below, Barbri agrees to maintain usability of the web applications, tools, modules, and components that underwent remediation on both the login

Consent Decree

Page 8

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 9 of 28 PageID 3221

portion of its bar review course (at esc.barbri.com) and mobile applications as set forth above through any updates, maintenance, modifications, or reformatting of the login portion of the bar review website and mobile applicationduring the term of this Consent Decree, and Barbri will no longer use the Usablenet alternative assistive site as an accommodation for screen reader users and other visually impaired students. Timeline for Website and Mobile Application Remediation 19. Barbri will complete its required website and mobile application remediation obligations as set forth in Paragraphs 14-18 according to the following schedule: a. For the Winter 2018 course (starting in December 2017), Barbri will utilize the
dynamic assistive site hosted by Usablenet for visually impaired students who use screen readers, and as set forth in Paragraph 17, Barbri will require Usablenet to remediate the dynamic assistive site as specified within the confidential Settlement Agreement. . b. For the Summer 2018 course (starting in May 2018), Barbri will continue to utilize the dynamic assistive site hosted by Usablenet for visually impaired students who use screen readers, as an interim solution. c. Barbri will implement website and mobile applications remediations in the Winter 2019 course (starting in December 2018). Barbri will test and evaluate the accessibility and usability of the login portion of its website (at esc.barbri.com) and its mobile applications during the Winter 2019 course. In the event there are any components, tools, web applications or modules subject to this Consent

Consent Decree

Page9

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 10 of 28 PageID 3222

Decree and the confidential Settlement Agreement that are not usable during the Winter 2019 course, Barbri will make note of those accessibility barriers and address and correct such issues between the Winter 2019 and Summer 2019 courses. Barbri will have all accessibility remediation efforts completed by the beginning of the Summer 2019 course (starting in May 2019). d. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the timeline for completion is subject to acts of God, force majeure, or events beyond Barbri's control, such as the inability of third-party software development contractors who develop or provide software subject to remediation to meet the deadlines imposed in this Consent Decree with respect to their own intellectual property. In the event of such unforeseen circumstances, the time period for completion of the remediation will be extended by the number of days reasonably attributable to such delay-causing event as long as Barbri provides notice to Plaintiffs, along with a statement explaining such unforeseen circumstances, within 15 days2 of the occurrence of such events. e. To the extent it is determined by Barbri's website accessibility consultant or Barbri's third-party software development contractors that a remediation cannot be completed without substantially altering the fundamental nature of a website application, module, tool, component, or mobile application feature, then Barbri will contact directly Mike Paciello at The Paciello Group, or one of his colleagues

2 Unless specified otherwise, "days" means calendar days. Consent Decree

Page 10

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 11 of 28 PageID 3223
at The Paciello Group in the event Mr. Paciello is unavailable for whatever reason, to explain the issue. If Mr. Paciello agrees with Barbri's determination that the remediation cannot be completed without substantially altering the fundamental nature of the website application, module, tool, component, or mobile application feature, Barbri will be excused from remediating the particular website application, module, tool, component, or mobile application as otherwise required under this Consent Decree. If Mr. Paciello disagrees with Barbri's determination that the remediation cannot be completed without substantially altering the fundamental nature of the website application, module, tool, component, or mobile application feature, Barbri will consult directly with Mr. Paciello to craft a remediation that can be completed without substantially altering the fundamental nature of the item at issue. Barbri will bear all consulting fees and expenses arising out of its independent consultation with Mike Paciello and the Paciello Group. Confirmation of Website and Mobile Application Remediation 20. Barbri will undergo an accessibility audit for the Summer 2019 course to verify that it has removed all accessibility barriers for screen reader users or other visually impaired students as required by the obligations set forth above in Paragraphs 14-18 and as specifically set forth in the confidential Settlement Agreement. The accessibility audit will be performed by an independent web accessibility consultant selected and retained by Barbri.

Consent Decree

Page 11

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 12 of 28 PageID 3224

21. Any technical violations of the WCAG 2.0 AA Success Criteria noted by the website accessibility consultant that do not affect the usability of the components, tools, web applications, or modules of the login portion of its bar review course (at esc.barbri.com) or its mobile applications for screen reader users and other visually impaired students, according to the definition of usable as set forth in paragraph 14, will not be deemed to be violations of this Consent Decree. In the event the web accessibility consultant identifies any web applications, components, tools, or modules as not usable for screen reader users or other visually impaired students on the login portion of Barbri's website or on Barbri's mobile applications, if such web application, component, tool, or module was not available during the Summer 2017 bar review course and is not a replacement as defined in Paragraph 14 above, any finding by the website accessibility consultant that such component, web application, tool, or module is not usable will not be deemed to be a violation of or subject to this Consent Decree or the confidential Settlement Agreement.
22. In the event the website accessibility consultant determines that Barbri has remediated its site in compliance with its obligations under this Consent Decree and the confidential Settlement Agreement, such that the components, modules, tools, and web applications of the login portion of Barbri's website (at esc.barbri.com) and Barbri's mobile applications that are subject to this Consent Decree and the confidential Settlement Agreement are usable (as defined in this Consent Decree at Paragraph 14), the website accessibility consultant will provide a Notice of Website and Mobile Application Correction. The Notice of Website and Mobile Application

Consent Decree

Page 12

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 13 of 28 PageID 3225
Correction will include confirmation by the website accessibility consultant that the consultant (1) has reviewed Barbri's obligations under this Consent Decree with respect to remediation of the login portion of its website and its mobile applications; (2) has audited Barbri's site using live-user testing and web accessibility evaluation techniques accepted in the industry, and (3) that Barbri has complied with the obligations in this Consent Decree. Barbri, through its attorneys, will file the Notice of Website and Mobile Application Correction in this civil action by July 1, 2019 and will serve Plaintiffs through their attorneys through the CM/ECF system. 23. In addition to the Notice of Website and Mobile Application Correction, upon request by Plaintiffs or their counsel, Barbri must also provide to Plaintiffs copies of all final web accessibility audit reports completed by the website accessibility consultant associated with the Summer 2019 audit. Web Accessibility Coordinator 24. Barbri will designate an employee as the Web Accessibility Coordinator for esc.barbri.com and the mobile applications. The Web Accessibility Coordinator: a. will be knowledgeable about the terms of this Consent Decree and the
confidential Settlement Agreement entered into between the Parties, WCAG 2.0, and web accessibility generally; b. will be responsible for overseeing, managing, and coordinating Barbri's implementation of this Consent Decree and the Settlement Agreement entered into between the Parties; c. will act as an accessibility monitor for the login portion of Barbri's website (at esc.barbri.com) and the mobile applications.

Consent Decree

Page 13

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 14 of 28 PageID 3226

Web Accessibility Training 25. One time during the term of this Consent Decree, Barbri will provide mandatory
web accessibility training to all development team employees who write or develop programs or code for, or who publish final content, to esc.barbri.com or its mobile applications on how to conform all web content and services with, at minimum, WCAG 2.0 AA Success Criteria and the terms of this Consent Decree. Barbri will ensure that its software development contractors are familiar with WCAG 2.0 and the requirements of this Consent Decree to the extent necessary to perform the duties under their contract. ADA Director Accessibility Training 26. During the term of this Consent Decree, Barbri will ensure that its National ADA Director and any new person that occupies the role of National ADA Director has attended a formal ADA training session to be provided by a provider agreed to by the Parties. In addition, training materials for the National ADA Director, regional ADA coordinators, and campus representatives w ill include the internal benchmarks set below in Paragraphs 27(b) and 27(c) related to the required timelines for students to make requests for accommodations. Internal Benchmarks and Policies for Responding to Requests for Accommodations 27. During the term of this Consent Decree, Barbri agrees to set the following internal benchmarks for responding to requests for reasonable accommodations from students with visual impairments or sight-based disabilities:
a. Within 5 business days of Barbri receiving a Request for Accommodation from a blind or visually impaired student, Barbri will

Consent Decree

Page 14

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 15 of 28 PageID 3227

provide the student a list of common reasonable accommodations offered to blind students.
b. Barbri will provide all print materials in the requested digital format or large print no later than one week before the first day of instruction for the applicable course if the visually impaired student has requested accommodations at least 60 days before the first day of instruction. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, Barbri will provide print materials requested in Braille no later than one week before the first day of instruction only if the student has requested Braille materials at least 90 days before the first day of instruction.
c. If a student requests accommodations for print materials less than 60 days before the first day of instruction (or less than 90 days before the first day of instruction if the student requests Braille materials), Barbri will provide the requested materials as soon as possible and will endeavor to provide the materials before the date the particular materials are needed in the course.
d. Upon request, Barbri will provide course lecture videos on MP4s on a flashdrive either one week before the first day of instruction or within 5 business days of receipt of a request for such videos, whichever is later.
e. Barbri will make its best efforts to include a link to the ADA Accommodations Page on its marketing website within all its marketing material transmitted via email in advance of a bar review course to students enrolled in law school who receive marketing materials from Barbri by email in advance of a bar review course.
f. Barbri will enforce its existing requirement that lecturers use the templates for handouts and submit the completed templates on time.
g. Barbri will implement a web-based reporting tool for complaints, concerns, and suggestions about accessibility by students with disabilities, and the tool will be monitored by both the National ADA Director and a designated web developer or other appropriate staff member.
h. Barbri agrees that it will collect all accessibility complaints or concerns received during a bar review course related to the experience of visually impaired students. By August 31 of each year of this consent decree (for the summer course) or March 31 of each year of this consent decree (for the winter course), the National ADA Director will

Consent Decree

Page 15

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 16 of 28 PageID 3228

generate a report with all accessibility complaints, to be forwarded to Barbri's VP of Operations. Any website accessibility issues will be forwarded to the development team. If Barbri's development team cannot identify a technological fix for a particular website accessibility complaint and if the same website accessibility complaint is repeated in consecutive bar review courses, Barbri will consult an outside accessibility expert regarding solutions for remediating the complaint. 1. Barbri agrees that it will endeavor to implement any non-web-based changes prior to the start of its Winter 2018 course, and it will have all changes finalized and in place for the Summer 2018 course. Modification to Barbri's Enrollment Agreement 28. During the term of this Consent Decree, Barbd will modify its enrollment agreement
to allow the student to select an option that indicates: "I am interested in learning
more about reasonable accommodations provided by BARBRI Bar Review to
students with disabilities." Students who select this option will be contacted by e-
mail no later than five business days of Barbri's receipt of the completed enrollment
agreement with information about how to obtain reasonable accommodations.
Notice and Opportunity to Cure 29. If Plaintiffs or their counsel believes that this Consent Decree or any portion of it has
been violated with respect to Barbri's obligations under this Consent Decree or the
confidential Settlement Agreement, including if Barbri fails to timely provide the
Notice of Website and Mobile Application Correction as required by Paragraph 22,
or if Barbri fails to comply with the obligations set forth in Paragraph 27 above, prior
to seeking enforcement of this Consent Decree, Plaintiffs or their counsel shall give
notice (including reasonable specifics) of such suspected violation to Barbri. Barbri
must respond to such notice as soon as practicable, but no later than 10 days after

Consent Decree

Page 16

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 17 of 28 PageID 3229

receipt of such notice by (1) notifying Plaintiffs that it concedes the violation and will agree to remediate the violation or (2) notifying Plaintiffs that it disputes the violation. 30. If the suspected violation relates or refers to Barbri's website or mobile applications remediations, Plaintiffs may request login credentials for the login portion of the bar review course (at esc.barbri.com) and mobile applications, and Barbri will provide login credentials for the course in progress at the time of the request within 10 days of the request. If the request for login credentials is made at a time when Barbri's bar review course is not in session, Barbri may provide login credentials for a sample account that may not have content identical to course content available on the website when the course is in session. 31. In the event Plaintiffs' notice of suspected violation relates to or refers to a web application, component, tool, or module on the login portion of Barbri's website (at esc.barbri.com) or on Barbri's mobile applications that was not available during the Summer 2017 bar review course (as identified in the Confidential Settlement Agreement) and does not replace the components or web applications that were required to be remediated under the confidential Settlement Agreement or this Consent Decree, any finding that such component, web application, tool, or module is not usable will not be deemed to be a violation of or subject to the Settlement Agreement or this Consent Decree. 32. In the event Barbri disputes it has violated this Consent Decree, if the suspected violation relates to the login portion of Barbri's website (at esc.barbri.com) or

Consent Decree

Page 17

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 18 of 28 PageID 3230

Barbri's mobile applications, Barbri will send Plaintiffs or their counsel a response confirmed by a web accessibility consultant explaining the basis for Barbri's dispute with the Plaintiffs' notice of suspected violation. If the suspected violation pertains to Barbri's delivery of print materials or other provisions of this Consent Decree that do not relate to Barbri's website and mobile application remediation obligations, Barbri will send Plaintiffs a written response setting forth the basis of its disagreement. 33. If after receiving Barbri's response, Plaintiffs continue to believe the Consent Decree has been violated either with respect to Barbri's remediation of the login portion of its website (at esc.barbri.com), or its mobile applications, or with respect to Barbri's provision of written course materials or other obligations under this Consent Decree, the Parties shall coordinate a meeting, which may include their own web accessibility consultants or experts as appropriate, to discuss the dispute and whether a resolution can be reached with respect to the dispute. 34. In the event the Parties are able to reach a compromised resolution regarding the suspected violations that requires Barbri to take some corrective action, or in the event Barbri acknowledges a violation of the Consent Decree, Barbri will have 90 days starting from the date of compromise or acknowledgment to correct the violation before Plaintiffs may seek court enforcement of this Consent Decree. Barbri will make its best efforts to complete and implement the required remediation prior to the expiration of the 90-day period if possible.If the Parties reach the compromised resolution or Barbri acknowledges the violation while a bar review

Consent Decree

Page 18

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 19 of 28 PageID 3231

course is in progress or less than 90 days before the start of a bar review course, and if the violation results in a website or mobile application accessibility barrier to visually impaired students enrolled in a bar review course that impacts the students' ability to obtain course materials or to participate in the online learning tools or web applications of the course, Bar bri will engage in an interactive process with the affected students, including notifying all blind students or students with known visual impairments enrolled in the course, to provide a reasonable accorrunodation to ensure effective communication of the material conveyed by the web application, tool, component, or module at issue during the bar review course, and Barbri shall offer such reasonable accommodation to all visually impaired students enrolled in the course who have requested reasonable accorrunodations. In the event Barbri invokes this 90-day cure period, within the sooner of 7 business days after Barbri completes the remediation or the last day of the 90-day period, Barbri must provide notice to the Plaintiffs identifying what steps were taken during the cure period to correct the alleged violation and confirming the remediation was performed. In the event the correction involves website remediation, Barbri must provide login credentials to Plaintiffs' expert upon request so that Plaintiffs may confirm remediation of the violation. 35. If the Parties are unable to reach a mutually acceptable resolution, or if Barbri fails to correct the violation within the 90-day cure p eriod set forth in Paragraph 34, Plaintiffs may seek court enforcement of compliance with this Decree. Plaintiffs and Barbri will each bear their own attorneys' fees and costs and any expert or

Consent Decree

Page 19

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 20 of 28 PageID 3232

consulting fees, costs, and expenses incurred for the notice and cure period. The court may, in its discretion, award reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees and costs to prosecute the enforcement action if Plaintiffs demonstrate a material breach of this Consent Decree. If Plaintiffs fail to demonstrate a material breach of this Consent Decree in an enforcement action, the Court may, in its discretion, award Barbri reasonable and necessary attorneys' fees and costs for defending the enforcement action.

III. Release by Plaintiffs 36. For and in consideration of the promises, covenants, and undertakings contained in
this Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Plaintiffs Claire Stanley, Derek Manners, and Christopher Stewart each herein irrevocably and completely release, acquit, and forever discharge Barbri, Inc., including its parents, predecessors, successors, assignees, subsidiaries, employees, agents, representatives, affiliates, insurers, and attorneys and all other entities or person(s) related to or affiliated with Barbri, Inc., of and from any and all legal or equitable claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, obligations, damages, losses, costs, attorneys' fees and expenses of every kind and nature whatsoever, arising under Title III of the ADA or any other federal, state, or local law governing access features and policies for persons with disabilities applicable to public accommodations or public facilities, and any claims which each Plaintiff has or may have against Barbri, Inc. relating to and arising out of Barbri's

Consent Decree

Page 20

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 21 of 28 PageID 3233

bar review course, its website, its print materials and materials provided in electronic or digital formats, and its mobile applications, up and until the effective date of the confidential Settlement Agreement, except that Plaintiffs retain the right to enforce this Consent Decree and the Settlement Agreement. 37. As a material inducement for Barbri to enter into this Agreement, Plaintiffs each represent and warrant that they are not aware of any pending tort, contract, or other legal claims against Barbri arising out of or related to the allegations in their First Amended Complaint, other than the specific claims brought in this Action under Title III of the ADA and Chapter 121 of the Texas Human Resources Code, which are released under this Agreement. 38. Plaintiffs each represent and warrant that no portion of any of the matters released by this Agreement and no portion of any recovery or settlement to which they might be entitled have been assigned or transferred to any other person, firm, or corporation not a party to this Agreement, in any manner, including by way of subrogation or operation of law or otherwise.
IV. Other Provisions 39. It is expressly understood and agreed that this Agreement and the performance of
the obligations in this Agreement reflect the compromise and settlement of disputed claims among the Parties and are for the sole purpose of compromising and settling the disputed claims. This Agreement and its provisions, including any and all drafts, communications, and discussions relating to it, shall not be construed as or deemed to be an admission of liability or wrongdoing by Barbri or evidence of an admission

Consent Decree

Page 21

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 22 of 28 PageID 3234

or concession of any point of fact or law by Barbri, and shall not be offered or received in evidence or requested in discovery in any action or proceeding as evidence of an admission of liability. Barbri expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing whatsoever. 40. This Consent Decree shall become effective as of the date of the Court's entry of it and shall remain in effect for 3 years from that date. 41. This Consent Decree, and the actions described in it, are intended to remedy all violations or potential violations of the ADA and the Texas Human Resources Code alleged in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint in this action. 42. No modification of this Consent Decree shall be effective unless approved by the Court. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, any time limits or deadlines for performance imposed by this Consent Decree may be extended by the mutual written agreement of the Parties. 43. If any provision of this Consent Decree is determined to be invalid, unenforceable, or otherwise contrary to applicable law, such provision shall be deemed restated to reflect as nearly as possible and to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law its original intent and shall not, in any event, affect any other provisions, all of which shall remain valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. 44. This Consent Decree shall be binding on Barbri, Inc. and its subsidiaries, agents, employees and officers. In the event that Barbri, Inc. seeks to transfer or assign all or part of its interest in any service covered by this Decree, and the successor or assign intends on carrying on the same or similar use of the website, online services, or bar

Consent Decree

Page 22

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 23 of 28 PageID 3235
review course, then as a condition of sale, the corporation shall obtain the written accession of the successor or assign to any obligations remaining u nder this Decree for the remaining term of this Decree. 45. The Parties shall provide a copy of this Decree to any person upon request. 46. The Plaintiffs' Complaint shall be dismissed with prejudice to refiling same but without prejudice to the Plaintiffs' rights to petition the Court, at any time during the duration of the Consent Decree, to reopen the case for purposes of enforcing this Consent Decree. The Parties will endeavor in good faith to resolve informally any differences regarding the interpretation of and compliance with this Consent Decree prior to bringing such matters to the Court for resolution. 47. The signatories represent they have the authority to bind the respective Parties identified below to the terms of this Decree.

Consent Decree

Page 23

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 24 of 28 PageID 3236
By their signatures below, the Parties respectfully consent to the entry of this Consent Decree.
For the Plaintiffs: Claire Stanley
Derek Mam1ers
c;~ Christopher Stewart

Consent Decree

Page 24

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 25 of 28 PageID 3237
By their signatures below, the Parties respectfully consent to the entry of this Consent Decree.
For the Plaintiffs: Claire Stanley Derek Manners Christopher Stewart

Consent Decree

Page 2-J
-· ,..... - - ~ . .. - ' · . "' - --- ,..... - - -- -- - --

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 26 of 28 PageID 3238
By their signatures below, the Parties respectfully consent to the entry of this Consent Decree.
For the Plaintiffs: Claire Stanley
Derek Manners
Christopher Stewart

Consent Decree

Page24

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 27 of 28 PageID 3239
Is/ Deepinder K. Goraya Deepinder K. Goraya (admitted pro hac vice) Matthew K. Handley (admitted pro hac vice)
WASHINGTON LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND URBAN AFFAIRS 11 Dupont Circle, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 319-1000 (phone) (202) 319-1010 (fax)
deepa goraya@washlaw.org matthew handley@washlaw.org
Joseph M. Sellers (admitted pro hac vice) Shaylyn Cochran (admitted pro hac vice) COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS AND TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 408-4600 (phone) (202) 408-4699 (fax)
jsellers@cohenmilstein.com scochran@cohenmilstein .com Counsel for the Named Plaintiffs and Proposed Class Counsel
Hani Mirza State Bar No. 24083512 TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT 501 Elm Street, Ste. #450 Dallas, Texas 75202 (972) 333-9200 (phone) (512) 474-0726 (fax) Counsel for the Named Plaintiffs

Consent Decree

Page 25

Case 3:16-cv-01113-BK Document 85 Filed 01/22/18 Page 28 of 28 PageID 3240

For Defendant Barbri, Inc.

C) ~>-A-·~- S) -~(~-->---~------
D~niel J. Wil~(/ .. .

Chief Financial Office ~

of Barbri, Inc.

M Jessica Glatzer Mason Texas Bar No. 24051001 jmason@gard ere.com Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP 1000 Louisiana, Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: 713-276-5793 Facsimile: 713-276-5555 Attorneysfor Defendant Barbrl, Inc.

and

R. Wayne Gordon Texas Bar No. 08206500 wayne.gordon@tbjbs.com AmieP. Fordan Texas Bar No. 24036580 amie.fordan@tbjbs.com Touchstond, Bernays, Johnston, Beall, Smith &
Stollenwerck, LLP 4040 Renaissance Tower 1201 Elm Street Dallas, Texas 75270 Telephone: 214-741-1166 Facsimile: 214~741-7548 Attorneysfor Defendant Barbr~ Inc.

Consent Decree

Page26


[CONTENT] April 25, 2016 | three | Barbri | the U.S. District Court | the Northern District | Texas ||| BarBri Inc. | Barbri Bar Review ||| Barbri | American | ADA | 42 | U.S.C. | § | 12111 | the Texas Human Resource ||| Texas Civil Rights Project | Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Affairs ||| Magistrate | Renee Harris ||| three | Barbri | Barbri ||| Barbri | Barbri ||| Job Access With Speech | JAWS ||| BarBri ||| July 1, 2016 ||| July 19, 2016 |||  ||| April 25, 2014 | Barbri | Barbri | Barbri ||| October 3, 2016 ||| February 10, 2017 |||  ||| October 2017 ||| Settlement Agreement ||| January 19, 2018 ||| Three days later ||| three years ||| ADA |||  ||| May 2020 [SUMMARY] On April 25, 2016, three individuals that were blind and enrolled in the Barbri bar exam preparation course filed this putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The plaintiffs brought this suit against BarBri Inc., aka Barbri Bar Review, a company that sells and provides products for bar exam preparation. The plaintiffs alleged that Barbri violated the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) (42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.) and the Texas Human Resource Code §§ 121.002-.003. The plaintiffs, represented by Texas Civil Rights Project and Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights/Urban Affairs, sought injunctive, monetary, and declaratory relief as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. This case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Renee Harris Toliver.

The three plaintiffs were all enrolled in the Barbri bar preparation course and relied on Barbri to prepare for the bar examination. The Barbri bar preparation course provided online bar review resources including online live chat to match Barbri students with tutors, an online planner, study outlines, online lecture notes, and online lecture videos. The website, however, was not compatible with the software that the plaintiffs relied on to access the internet, like Job Access With Speech (“JAWS”) screen readers. The plaintiffs requested reasonable accommodation, but BarBri did not provide them. 

On July 1, 2016, the defendant moved to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. The plaintiff amended their complaint on July 19, 2016. This new complaint added more factual allegations and slightly modified the definition of the sought class. The amended class definition was as follows: “All legally blind individuals nationwide who, on or after April 25, 2014, took, plan to take or attempted to take a Barbri bar review course at a time when Barbri’s website, mobile application, or other course materials was or is not fully accessible to legally blind students, or who have   been discouraged from taking the Barbri bar review course due to such inaccessibility.” 

The defendant again moved to dismiss the lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim on October 3, 2016. The plaintiffs moved to certify a class on February 10, 2017. The court never ruled on this motion.

In October 2017, the parties underwent settlement discussions. Eventually the parties reached a confidential Settlement Agreement. Then on January 19, 2018, the parties jointly moved for a stipulation of dismissal and sought approval of a consent decree.

Three days later, the court approved the parties’ consent decree. The parties agreed that the court would retain jurisdiction for three years to ensure compliance with this decree. The consent decree prohibited the defendant from engaging in disability discrimination, required the defendant to comply with the ADA, and required the defendant to undergo an accessibility audit to ensure that all accessibility barriers for screen readers were removed. The defendant also agreed to provide accessibility training to all development team employees and to reform its procedures for implementing reasonable accommodations when students request accommodations.

The consent decree remains in force as of May 2020. 
