1 JANET RENO

Attorney General
2
DEVAL L. PATRICK
3 Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
4
JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief
5 L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief
Disability Rights Section
6 Civil Rights Division
7 ALYSE S. BASS
THOMAS M. CONTOIS
8 KEN S. NAKATA
Attorneys
9 Disability Rights Section
Civil Rights Division
10 U.S. Department of Justice
Post Office Box 66738
11 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738
(202) 616-9511
12
United States of America
13
14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
17 Plaintiff,)
)
18 v. ) No.:
)
19 DAYS INNS OF AMERICA, INC., )
HOSPITALITY FRANCHISE ) COMPLAINT
20 SYSTEMS, INC., DILIP PATEL, )
IYER & ASSOCIATES, )
21 and R.E. HUFFMAN CORPORATION,)
)
22 )
Defendants. )
23 _____________________________)
24
The United States of America alleges:
25
 1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce
26
title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the
27
"ADA"), 42 U.S.C. SS 12181 through 12189, against:
28
01-01116​1 JANET RENO
Attorney General
2
DEVAL L. PATRICK
3 Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division
4
JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief
5 L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief
Disability Rights Section
6 Civil Rights Division

7 ALYSE S. BASS
THOMAS M. CONTOIS
8 KEN S. NAKATA
Attorneys
9 Disability Rights Section
Civil Rights Division
10 U.S. Department of Justice
Post Office Box 66738
11 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738
(202) 616-9511
12
United States of America
13
14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15
16 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
17 Plaintiff, )
)
18 v. ) No.:
)
19 DAYS INNS OF AMERICA, INC., )
HOSPITALITY FRANCHISE ) COMPLAINT
20 SYSTEMS, INC., DILIP PATEL, )
IYER & ASSOCIATES, )
21 and R.E. HUFFMAN CORPORATION, )
 )
22 )
Defendants. )
23 _______________________________)
24
The United States of America alleges:
25
1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce
26
title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the
27
"ADA"), 42 U.S.C. S S 12181 through 12189, against:
28
01-01117​1 a. Days Inns of America, Inc. ("DIA"), the
2 licensor of the Days Inn chain of economy hotels,
3 including the Days Inn hotel at 475 N. Humboldt,
4 Willows, California;
5 b. Hospitality Franchise Systems, Inc. ("HFS"),
6 the parent company of defendant DIA;
7 c. Dilip Patel ("Patel"), the owner of the Days
8 Inn hotel in Willows, California;
9 d. Iyer & Associates, the architects of the Days
10 Inn hotel in Willows, California; and
11 e. R.E. Huffman Corporation ("R.E. Huffman"),
12 the general contractor for the Days Inn hotel in
13 Willows, California.
14 2. This court has jurisdiction of this action under
15 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B), and 28 U.S.C. SS 1331 and 1345. The
16 court may grant declaratory and other relief pursuant to 28
17 U.S.C. S S 2201 and 2202.
18 3. Defendant HFS is a Delaware corporation with its
19 principal place of business at 339 Jefferson Road, Parsippany,
20 New Jersey 07054.
21 4. Defendant DIA is a Delaware corporation with its
22 principal place of business at 339 Jefferson Road, Parsippany,
23 New Jersey 07054. Defendant DIA is a wholly owned subsidiary of
24 defendant HFS.
25 5. Defendant Patel is an individual who resides at 4705
26 East Belknap Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas 76117.
27
28 2
01-01118​1 6. Defendant Iyer and Associates is a California
2 corporation with its principal place of business at 25 Kearny
3 Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California 94108.
4 7. Defendant R.E. Huffman is a California corporation with
5 its principal place of business at 775 Entler Avenue, Chico,
6 California 95928.
7 8. Venue is proper in this district. A substantial part
8 of the events and omissions giving rise to this action occurred
9 in this district.
10 9. Defendant DIA and, upon information and belief,
11 defendant HFS operate a system of approximately 1,500 hotels
12 throughout the United States under various trade and service
13 names and marks including "Days Inn," "Days Hotel," "Days
14 Suites," "DayStops," "Days Lodge," and others (collectively, the
15 "Days Inn system"). Defendants DIA and HFS do not own any of the
16 hotels that participate in the Days Inn system; rather, DIA has
17 entered into and maintains license agreements (the "license
18 agreements") with the owners or the agents of the owners of each
19 facility that participates in the Days Inn system.
20 10. One of the hotels in the Days Inn system is the newly
21 constructed Days Inn hotel at 475 N. Humboldt, Willows,
22 California 95988 (the "Willows Days Inn" or "the hotel").
23 11. The Willows Days Inn is a non-residential facility
24 whose operations affect commerce. As such, it is a commercial
25 facility within the meaning of section 303(a) of the ADA. 42
26 U.S.C. S 12183(a). In addition, because the Willows Days Inn is
27
28 3
01-01119​1 a place of lodging, it is also a public accommodation within the
2 meaning of section 303(a) of the ADA. Id.
3 12. The last application for a building permit for the
4 Willows Days Inn was made on or about March 2, 1993.
5 13. The first certificate of occupancy for the Willows Days
6 Inn was issued on or about September 30, 1993.
7 14. Defendant Patel owns the Willows Days Inn and
8 initiated, contracted for, or participated in the design and
9 construction of the hotel.
10 15. Defendant Iyer & Associates is a private entity engaged
11 in the business of providing architectural and design
12 specification services. Iyer & Associates participated in the
13 design and construction of the Willows Days Inn by designing the
14 hotel pursuant to a contract with defendant Patel.
15 16. Defendant R.E. Huffman is a private entity engaged in
16 the business of providing general contracting services. R.E.
17 Huffman participated in the design and construction of the
18 Willows Days Inn by constructing the hotel pursuant to a contract
19 with defendant Patel.
20 17. Defendants DIA and HFS controlled or participated in
21 the design and construction of the Willows Days Inn. Among other
22 things, DIA or HFS or both of them:
23 a. developed standard site plans, building plans,
24 room details, and other architectural drawings and
25 specifications for new Days Inn facilities;
26 b. by means of the license agreement, required
27 defendant Patel to design the hotel to conform to the plans,
28 4
01-01120​1 drawings, and specifications contained in the design
2 standards prepared by DIA and HFS;
3 c. by means of the license agreement, required
4 Defendant Patel, prior to construction of the Willows Days
5 Inn, to submit to DIA for DIA's review and approval the
6 facility's site plan, working drawings, and detail
7 specifications;
8 d. as contemplated by the license agreement,
9 reviewed, recommended changes in, and approved architectural
10 plans prepared by Defendant Iyer & Associates for the
11 Willows hotel;
12 e. by means of the license agreement, required
13 Defendant Patel to construct the Willows Days Inn in accord
14 with the plans, drawings, and specifications approved by
15 DIA;
16 f. by means of the license agreement, required
17 Defendant Patel, upon completion of construction, to obtain
18 from DIA a final approval of the facility before the hotel
19 could begin operating as part of the Days Inn system; and
20 h. upon information and belief, inspected the Willows
21 Days Inn shortly after the completion of construction.
22 18. The Willows Days Inn is not readily accessible to or
23 usable by individuals with disabilities, as required by section
24 303(a)(1) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a)(1). The hotel fails
25 in numerous respects to comply with the Department of Justice's
26 regulation implementing title III of the ADA, 28 C.F.R. Part 36
27 ("the regulation"), including the Standards for Accessible
28 5
01-01121​1 Design, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A ("the Standards"). See 28
2 C.F.R. SS 36.401, 36.406.
3 19. Illustrative examples of the failures of the Willows
4 Days Inn to comply with the requirements of the ADA and the
5 regulation, including the Standards, include, but are not limited
6 to, the items set forth below. "Accessible," as used below,
7 means "readily accessible to and usable by individuals with
8 disabilities," as required by section 303(a)(1) of the ADA, 42
9 U.S.C. S 12183(a)(1), and as specified by the Standards.
10 a. Guests with disabilities at the Willows Days Inn
11 do not have a choice of sleeping accommodations
12 equivalent to that afforded to other guests. The hotel
13 has standard guest rooms with two beds, plus at least
14 one guest room with a whirlpool tub, but both of the
15 guest rooms designated for use by individuals with
16 disabilities have only one bed, and no whirlpool tub.
17 See Standards S 9.1.4.
18 b. The guest rooms that are designated for use by
19 individuals with disabilities are not accessible because
20 various operating controls, mechanisms, and features are
21 either mounted too high to be reached by an individual using
22 a wheelchair, are blocked by the placement of the beds,
23 tables, or other furniture, or require tight grasping,
24 pinching, or twisting of the wrist, which is difficult or
25 impossible for individuals with limited manual dexterity,
26 including many individuals with paraplegia or quadriplegia.
27 As a result, many individuals with disabilities will not be
28 6
01-01122​
1 able, in these guest rooms, to turn on or off the table and
2 bedside lamps, operate or control the room's heating and
3 air-conditioning unit, open and close the drapes, or use the
4 clothes rod and shelves. See Standards SS 4.25.3, 4.27.4.
5 c. The bathrooms in the guest rooms designated for
6 use by individuals with disabilities are not accessible
7 because there is inadequate clear floor space for an
8 individual using a wheelchair to be able to turn around
9 after entering the bathroom. In addition, there is
10 inadequate clear floor space at the toilets. As a
11 result, individuals using wheelchairs will not be able
12 to approach these fixtures closely enough, making it
13 difficult to use these fixtures, and potentially
14 hazardous, as individuals may fall while attempting to
15 use a fixture that has inadequate space, or is too far
16 from the required grab bars. See Standards S 4.16.2,
17 4.23.2.
18 d. The hotel fails to provide visual alarms in guest
19 rooms for individuals who are deaf or hard-of-hearing to be
20 alerted to smoke, fire or other emergencies in the hotel,
21 and fails to provide any visual notification devices in
22 guest rooms for persons who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, to
23 alert them to incoming telephone calls and door knocks or
24 bells. See Standards SS 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.3.
25 e. The doors to the bathrooms in the standard
26 guest rooms -- that is, the guest rooms that are not
27 designated for use by individuals with disabilities
28 7
01-01123​1 are too narrow. If someone who uses a wheelchair must
2 stay in a non-accessible guest room (if, for instance,
3 the accessible guest rooms are already taken), or
4 visits another guest in a non-accessible guest room, he
5 or she will not be able even to enter the bathroom in
6 that room. See Standards S 9.4.
7 f. Neither of the two parking spaces designated as
8 accessible is on the shortest accessible route to the guest
9 rooms that are designated accessible. See Standards S
10 4.6.2. The spaces designated as accessible are located on
11 the opposite side of the building from the guest rooms
12 designated for use by individuals with disabilities.
13 (Because many individuals with disabilities have limited
14 strength or stamina, the Standards require that accessible
15 parking spaces be on the shortest accessible route to a
16 facility's entrances.) See Standards SS 4.1.2(5), 4.6.4(a).
17 g. The hotel's stairways do not have cane-detectable
18 barriers to prevent people who are blind or who have low
19 vision from walking into the underside of those stairways.
20 (A cane-detectable barrier can consist of any object that a
21 person using a cane can detect before running into the
22 stairway, such as a railing or a curb.) See Standards
22 stairway, such as a railing or a curb.) See Standards
23 S 4.4.2.
24 20. The failures of the defendants to design and construct
25 the Willows Days Inn to be readily accessible to and usable by
26 individuals with disabilities constitute a pattern or practice of
27
28 8
01-01124​1 discrimination within the meaning of 42 U.S.C.
2 S 12188(b)(1)(B)(i) and 28 C.F.R. S 36.503(a).
3 21. In addition to constituting a pattern or practice of
4 discrimination, the failures of the defendants to design and
5 construct the Willows Days Inn to be readily accessible to and
6 usable by individuals with disabilities constitute unlawful
7 discrimination that raises an issue of general public importance
8 within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B)(ii) and 28
9 C.F.R. S 36.503(b).
10 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
11 The United States prays that the Court:
12 A. Declare that the defendants have violated title III of
13 the Americans with Disabilities ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12181 through
14 12189, and the regulations thereunder, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, by
15 failing to design and construct a new facility for first
16 occupancy after January 26, 1993, that is readily accessible to
17 and usable by individuals with disabilities;
18 B. Order the defendants to undertake all repairs,
19 rebuilding, or other remedial steps necessary to bring the
20 Willows Days Inn into full compliance with the requirements of
21 title III of the ADA and the Department of Justice's regulation
22 implementing title III, including the Standards for Accessible
23 Design;
24 C. With respect to any facilities that they may design and
25 construct in the future, order the defendants to design and
26 construct those facilities in such a manner that they will be
27 readily accessible to and usable by individuals with
28 9
01-01125​1 disabilities, as required by section 303(a) of title III of the
2 ADA, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a), sections 36.401 and 36.406 of the
3 title III regulation, 28 C.F.R. SS 36.401, 36.406, and the
4 Standards for Accessible Design, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A;
5 D. Assess a civil penalty against each defendant in an
6 amount authorized by 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(2)(C), to vindicate the
7 public interest; and
8 E. Order such other appropriate relief as the interests of
9 justice may require.
10 JANET RENO
Attorney General
11

12
By:
13 CHARLES J. STEPHENS DEVAL L. PATRICK
United States Attorney Assistant Attorney General
14 Eastern District of California Civil Rights Division
15
16 DEBORA G. LUTHER JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief
Assistant U.S. Attorney L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief
17 Eastern District of California Disability Rights Section
650 Capitol Mall Civil Rights Division
18 Sacramento, Ca. 95814
19
20 ALYSE S. BASS
THOMAS M. CONTOIS
21 KEN S. NAKATA
Attorneys
22 Disability Rights Section
Civil Rights Division
23 U.S. Department of Justice
Post Office Box 66738
24 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738
(202) 616-9511
25 (202) 514-6014
(202) 307-2232
26
27
28 10
01-01126