Case: Betancourt-Colon v. City of San Juan

3:19-cv-01837 | U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico

Filed Date: Sept. 6, 2019

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a case about a lack of accessible curb ramps in the City of San Juan for people with mobility disabilities. On September 6, 2019, four individuals seeking to represent a class of people with mobility disabilities who used or would use the pedestrian right of way in San Juan filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. The plaintiffs sued the City of San Juan under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation…

This is a case about a lack of accessible curb ramps in the City of San Juan for people with mobility disabilities. On September 6, 2019, four individuals seeking to represent a class of people with mobility disabilities who used or would use the pedestrian right of way in San Juan filed this lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. The plaintiffs sued the City of San Juan under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973  (“Section 504”). Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief as well as attorneys’ fees. The plaintiffs asked the court to issue a permanent injunction requiring the City to cure past violations of the ADA and Section 504 by constructing and altering ramps as necessary to ensure that they complied with those statutes. The plaintiffs alleged that by not providing accessible curb ramps and by not remediating and repairing current ramps, the City had discriminated against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs further alleged that the City had engaged in discrimination by allowing numerous parts of the city to be inaccessible to people with mobility disabilities. The case was assigned to Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi.

The City moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim on November 14, 2019. On December 5, 2019, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that added two named plaintiffs, as well as details about specific occurrences when a lack of proper sidewalks served as a barrier to plaintiffs accessing facilities like government buildings and medical services. 

The City moved to dismiss the amended complaint on December 27, 2019. The City argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue because they had not shown an injury-in-fact or harm that could be traced to the conduct of the City. The City also argued that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because they had not established exclusion from participation in or denial of the benefits of the services, programs or activities of a public entity. 

On September 1, 2020, the court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiffs had standing and had sufficiently stated a claim under which relief could be granted. The plaintiffs had shown injury-in-fact through the lack of accessibility to sidewalks which denied them access to accommodations and services available to the general public. The court further found that the plaintiffs had standing through the ADA and Section 504, as it was not disputed that they were individuals with disabilities. The court noted, however, that the question of whether sidewalks were considered “services” under Title II of the ADA required further briefing. Under Title II, the plaintiffs would need to prove that they were either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of some public entity’s services, programs, or activities or were otherwise discriminated against. See 42 U.S.C. § 12132. The court ordered the parties to provide further memoranda regarding the issue. 2020 WL 5221713.

On November 12, 2020, after further briefing by the parties, the court resolved the contested "services" issue. The court reviewed the statements provided by the parties, as well as a statement of interest submitted by the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. The DOJ statement laid out the United States’ interest in ensuring that the ADA was properly enforced and explained its long-held position that sidewalks qualify as a service, program, or activity under the ADA. Based on the arguments and precedent finding that sidewalks were covered services under the statute, the court found that a public entity's provision and maintenance of sidewalks is a covered "service, program, or activity" under Title II. See Mote v. City of Chelsea, 252 F. Supp. 3d 642, 655 (E.D. Mich. 2017) (“[any] sensible reading of ADA Title II compels the conclusion that maintaining public pedestrian thoroughfares for citizens to get around a city—and access the many public services and businesses located within—is the archetypal example of the most fundamental of public services”).

On December 2, 2020, the court stayed all proceedings in the case until January 15, 2021 because a new municipal government was scheduled to be sworn in in January of 2021. The court said it was "important that the new Municipal government [had] an opportunity to evaluate the case." The court urged the parties to seek settlement once the stay concluded. 

On February 12, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a motion requesting court ordered mediation in response to the court's December 2, 2020 order. The court granted the motion, stayed all other deadlines, and referred the case to Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler for mediation. The first mediation session was held on May 21, 2021. The United States was ordered to attend the mediation session in order to discuss its previously submitted statement of interest. Another mediation session was held a month later, after which the parties were ordered to file a status report regarding the outcome of the City’s efforts to engage a contractor specializing in ADA compliance and to retain an ADA coordinator. At the next mediation session, a schedule was set for the plaintiffs to submit a settlement demand. On November 3, 2021, the case was reassigned to Judge Jay A. Garcia-Gregory after Judge Gelpi was appointed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. Further mediation hearings were held in November and December of 2021 as well as in March, June, and July of 2022.

On May 27, 2022, the parties filed a joint motion to lift the stay as they had been unable to reach a settlement and the City had rejected the plaintiffs' proposed settlement agreement. The United States requested to participate in the hearing on the joint motion. Because neither party had objected to the United States’ participation thus far, the court allowed the request to participate in the hearing and further mediation. On June 8, 2022, the court denied the motion to lift the stay. At a mediation session the following day, the parties notified the court that they had been able to work through their impasse and that mediation would continue. 

On July 9, 2022, the City moved for sanctions after the plaintiffs' attorney failed to attend a mediation meeting that had already been rescheduled because of a request by the plaintiffs' attorney.

On September 12, 2022, the United States formally moved to intervene as a plaintiff, which the court granted on the same day. In its intervenor complaint, the federal government asserted that the plaintiffs could not properly represent their interests as the federal government represented the public interest and any remedial plan the parties agreed on would impact the United States’ responsibility in ensuring that the relevant statutes were properly enforced. The United States further noted that the USDOT Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) had also investigated the sidewalks in a specific San Juan neighborhood after receiving a complaint alleging violations of accessibility issues with pedestrian rights-of-way submitted to the DOJ in April of 2017. The FHWA had issued a Letter of Findings in March of 2019 detailing numerous violations which they tried to reconcile with the City over the course of three years.  In March of 2022, FHWA referred its findings of noncompliance to the United States for appropriate action. The United States then conducted its own investigation of the City's sidewalk system and found many violations of the relevant statutes. The United States sought to intervene in this case in order to properly address the FHWA's findings and to ensure that Title II of the ADA and Section 504 would be properly enforced. 

As of December 6, 2022, the case was ongoing with the parties still engaged in mediation. 

Summary Authors

Rhea Sharma (10/12/2022)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

3:19-cv-01837

Complaint

Sept. 6, 2019

Sept. 6, 2019

Complaint
11

3:19-cv-01837

Amended Complaint

Dec. 5, 2019

Dec. 5, 2019

Complaint
17

3:19-cv-01837

Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction AND Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Sept. 1, 2020

Sept. 1, 2020

Order/Opinion

3:19-cv-01837

Statement of Interest of the United States of America

Nov. 9, 2020

Nov. 9, 2020

Pleading / Motion / Brief
89

3:19-cv-01837

United States' Unopposed Motion to Intervene as a Plaintiff

Sept. 12, 2022

Sept. 12, 2022

Pleading / Motion / Brief

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16166818/betancourt-colon-v-city-of-san-juan/

Last updated Dec. 6, 2022, 4:06 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against City of San Juan ( Filing fee $400 receipt number 0104-6576785.), filed by Virgen Negron-Villegas, Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon. Service due by 12/5/2019, (Attachments: # 1 Category Sheet, # 2 Civil Cover Sheet, # 3 Summons)(Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 09/06/2019)

1 Category Sheet

View on PACER

2 Civil Cover Sheet

View on PACER

3 Summons

View on PACER

Sept. 6, 2019

Sept. 6, 2019

Clearinghouse
2

NOTICE OF JUDGE ASSIGNMENT Case has been assigned to Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi (arg) (Entered: 09/09/2019)

Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

PACER
3

Summons Issued as to City of San Juan (Attachments: # 1 Summons) (arg) (Entered: 09/09/2019)

1 Summons

View on PACER

Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

PACER
4

STANDING ORDERS: (1) DISCOVERY DISPUTES, (2) COURTESY COPIES, (3) DEPOSITIONS IN CIVIL CASES, (4) CONSENT TO PROCEED BEFORE A U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE, (5) COMMUNICATIONS BY COUNSEL OR THEIR STAFF WITH JUDGE GELPI'S CHAMBERS' STAFF, (6) CODE OF CIVILITY. (gmm) (Entered: 09/09/2019)

Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

PACER

Notice of Judge Assignment

Sept. 9, 2019

Sept. 9, 2019

PACER
5

SUMMONS Returned Executed by All Plaintiffs upon City of San Juan served on 9/11/2019, answer due 10/2/2019. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 09/12/2019)

Sept. 12, 2019

Sept. 12, 2019

PACER
6

NOTICE of Appearance by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 09/30/2019)

Sept. 30, 2019

Sept. 30, 2019

PACER
7

MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer the Complaint or Otherwise Plead filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 10/15/2019. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 09/30/2019)

Sept. 30, 2019

Sept. 30, 2019

PACER
8

RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion filed by All Plaintiffs Re: 7 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer the Complaint or Otherwise Plead filed by City of San Juan filed by All Plaintiffs. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 09/30/2019)

Sept. 30, 2019

Sept. 30, 2019

PACER
9

ORDER: Granting as requested 7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 9/30/2019. (AGF) (Entered: 09/30/2019)

Sept. 30, 2019

Sept. 30, 2019

PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

Sept. 30, 2019

Sept. 30, 2019

PACER
10

MOTION to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction and under Rule 12(b)(6) as to Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 12/2/2019. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 11/14/2019)

Nov. 14, 2019

Nov. 14, 2019

PACER
11

AMENDED COMPLAINT (as a matter of course under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15) against City of San Juan, filed by Virgen Negron-Villegas, Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, A.V.R., William Rodriguez-Burgos.(Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 12/05/2019)

Dec. 5, 2019

Dec. 5, 2019

Clearinghouse
12

MOTION for extension of time until December 27, 2019 to File Responsive Pleading, MOTION for Extension of Time until December 27, 2019 to File Answer filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 1/2/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 12/19/2019)

Dec. 19, 2019

Dec. 19, 2019

PACER
13

ORDER: Granting as requested 12 Motion for extension of time; Granting as requested 12 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 12/19/2019. (AGF) (Entered: 12/19/2019)

Dec. 19, 2019

Dec. 19, 2019

PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Answer

Dec. 19, 2019

Dec. 19, 2019

PACER

Order on Motion for Extension of Time

Dec. 19, 2019

Dec. 19, 2019

PACER
14

MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Amended Complaint, MOTION to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction Amended Complaint as to A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 1/10/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 12/27/2019)

Dec. 27, 2019

Dec. 27, 2019

PACER
15

RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion filed by All Plaintiffs Re: 14 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Amended ComplaintMOTION to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction Amended Complaint as to A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos filed by City of San Juan filed by All Plaintiffs. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 01/13/2020)

Jan. 13, 2020

Jan. 13, 2020

PACER
16

NOTICE of Appearance by Teichka M. Rodriguez-Munoz on behalf of City of San Juan (Rodriguez-Munoz, Teichka) (Entered: 01/30/2020)

Jan. 30, 2020

Jan. 30, 2020

PACER
17

OPINION AND ORDER: Denying 14 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; Denying 14 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. The Court notes that whether sidewalks are indeed considered services under Title II of the ADA requires further briefing. Both parties have until October 30, 2020 to provide the Court with further simultaneous memoranda regarding this issue. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 9/1/2020. (AGF) Modified on 9/2/2020 to edit title (gmm). (Entered: 09/01/2020)

Sept. 1, 2020

Sept. 1, 2020

Clearinghouse
18

ORDER: Finding as moot 10 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 9/1/2020. (AGF) (Entered: 09/01/2020)

Sept. 1, 2020

Sept. 1, 2020

PACER

Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction

Sept. 1, 2020

Sept. 1, 2020

PACER
19

Motion In Compliance with Order at Docket 17 and Memorandum of Law filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 11/13/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) Modified on 11/2/2020 to edit text (gmm). (Entered: 10/30/2020)

Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

PACER
20

Motion In Compliance as to 17 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim,,, Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction,, filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of All Plaintiffs Responses due by 11/13/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Related document(s) 17 ) (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 10/30/2020)

Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

PACER
21

Amended Motion In Compliance with 17 Order re: 20 Motion filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of All Plaintiffs Responses due by 11/16/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Velez-Colon, Jose) Modified on 11/2/2020 to edit text (gmm). (Entered: 10/31/2020)

Oct. 31, 2020

Oct. 31, 2020

PACER
22

NOTICE of filing of Satement of Interest by the United States by United States of America (Attachments: # 1 Attachment) (Bhatia-Gautier, Lisa) (Entered: 11/09/2020)

1 Attachment

View on PACER

Nov. 9, 2020

Nov. 9, 2020

PACER
23

ORDER: Noted 22 Notice of filing of Statement of Interest by the United States by United States of America; Noted 21 Amended Motion In Compliance with 17 Order re: 20 Motion; Noted 20 Motion In Compliance as to 17 Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; Noted 19 Motion In Compliance with Order at Docket 17 and Memorandum of Law. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 11/12/2020. (CRH) (Entered: 11/12/2020)

Nov. 12, 2020

Nov. 12, 2020

PACER
24

ORDER: After reviewing the parties' submissions and applicable law, notably the Statement of Interest submitted by the United States, the Court rules that a public entity's provision and maintenance of sidewalks is a covered "service, program, or activity" under Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132. The Court is persuaded by the reasoning in Frame v. City of Arlington, 657 F.3d 215 (5th Cir. 2011) and Barden v. City of Sacramento, 292 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2002), which thoroughly explain why this ruling is supported by the statute's plain language and its implementing regulations. See also 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.104; 35.150(d)(2); 28 C.F.R. Part 35, App. B at § 35.150. Finally, the Court highlights that recent district court decisions have also found that sidewalks are covered services under Title II of the ADA. See American Council of the Blind of the City of New York v. City of New York, Civil No. 18-5792 (PAE), 2020 WL 6151251 (S.D.N.Y. 2020); Hamer v. City of Trinidad, 441 F. Supp. 3d 1155 (D. Colo. 2020); Mote v. City of Chelsea, 252 F. Supp. 3d 642 (E.D. Mich. 2017). The undersigning judge firmly decides that: "[a]ny sensible reading of ADA Title II compels the conclusion that maintaining public pedestrian thoroughfares for citizens to get around a city - and access the many public services and businesses located within - is the archetypal example of the most fundamental of public services." Mote, 252 F. Supp. 3d at 655. Accordingly, Defendant is hereby ordered to answer the Amended Complaint at Docket No. 11 by December 10, 2020. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 11/12/2020. (CRH) (Entered: 11/12/2020)

Nov. 12, 2020

Nov. 12, 2020

PACER

Order

Nov. 12, 2020

Nov. 12, 2020

PACER
25

ORDER re: Stay of Proceedings. The Court hereby stays all proceedings in this case until January 15, 2021. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 12/2/2020. (CRH) (Entered: 12/02/2020)

Dec. 2, 2020

Dec. 2, 2020

RECAP
26

MOTION requesting Order filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of All Plaintiffs Responses due by 12/16/2020. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 12/02/2020)

Dec. 2, 2020

Dec. 2, 2020

RECAP
27

ORDER: Denying without prejudice at this time 26 Motion requesting Order. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 12/3/2020. (CRH) (Entered: 12/03/2020)

Dec. 3, 2020

Dec. 3, 2020

PACER

Order on Motion requesting Order

Dec. 3, 2020

Dec. 3, 2020

PACER
28

MOTION requesting Order (court-ordered mediation) filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of All Plaintiffs Responses due by 2/26/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 02/12/2021)

Feb. 12, 2021

Feb. 12, 2021

PACER
29

ORDER: Granting 28 Motion requesting Order (court-ordered mediation). As per the order at Docket No. 25 this case is hereby REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler for mediation. All other deadlines are STAYED. Signed by Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi on 2/12/2021. (CRH) (Entered: 02/12/2021)

Feb. 12, 2021

Feb. 12, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion requesting Order

Feb. 12, 2021

Feb. 12, 2021

PACER
30

MOTION requesting Order filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos Responses due by 4/23/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 04/09/2021)

April 9, 2021

April 9, 2021

PACER
31

ORDER: Mediation Session to be held on May 21, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. before VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. A representative of each party with binding authority to settle the matter should be present. The parties are ordered to submit their ex parte Confidential Mediation Statements by May 14, 2021 to the following email address: heidi_pantoja@prd.uscourts.gov. Parties are advised that, in compliance with Local Rule 83J(e)(2)(B), mediation statements are not briefs but rather an outline of key facts and legal issues, and should not exceed ten (10) double-spaced pages. As part of the mediation statements, the parties must include a summary of past settlement efforts, if any, and their expectations regarding settlement. Counsel for non-party, the United States of America, is ordered to attend the Mediation Session in order to discuss the Statement of Interest at Docket No. 22-1. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 4/12/2021. (hgp) (Entered: 04/12/2021)

April 12, 2021

April 12, 2021

PACER

~Util - Set Hearings AND Order

April 12, 2021

April 12, 2021

PACER
32

NOTICE of Appearance by Adam F. Lewis on behalf of United States of America (Lewis, Adam) (Entered: 04/30/2021)

April 30, 2021

April 30, 2021

PACER
33

ORDER finding as moot 30 Motion requesting Order. See Docket No. 31. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 5/10/2021. (NV) (Entered: 05/10/2021)

May 10, 2021

May 10, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion requesting Order

May 10, 2021

May 10, 2021

PACER
34

ORDER: On April 12, 2021, the Court entered an Order establishing that the parties had to submit their ex parte Confidential Mediation Statements by 5/14/2021 (Docket No. 31). Defendant has failed to comply with this deadline and is thus ordered to submit its Mediation Statement tomorrow by close of business. In the alternative, Defendant must submit a motion showing cause as to why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to comply with the Courts order. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 5/17/2021.(NV) (Entered: 05/17/2021)

May 17, 2021

May 17, 2021

PACER

Order

May 17, 2021

May 17, 2021

PACER
35

NOTICE of Appearance by Lisa E. Bhatia-Gautier on behalf of United States of America (Bhatia-Gautier, Lisa) (Entered: 05/20/2021)

May 20, 2021

May 20, 2021

PACER
37

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: A Mediation Session was held on May 21, 2021. The parties expressed their expectations regarding mediation. The Court suggested, and Plaintiffs agreed to share their long-term plan with Defendant and the United States to help establish an initial framework in this mediation and a baseline for negotiations. During the hearing, Plaintiffs counsel sent the proposed long-term plan to Defendant and the United States via e-mail. The Court set action items and a schedule in furtherance of negotiations. Joint motion under seal informing as to the status of all matters addressed during the mediation due by June 18, 2021. Mediation Hearing set for June 24, 2021 at 10:00 AM in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) (Entered: 05/25/2021)

May 21, 2021

May 21, 2021

PACER
36

***Filed in Error- Wrong Entry See Dkt. #37*** Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: A Mediation Session was held on May 21, 2021. The parties expressed their expectations regarding mediation. The Court suggested, and Plaintiffs agreed to share their long-term plan with Defendant and the United States to help establish an initial framework in this mediation and a baseline for negotiations. During the hearing, Plaintiffs counsel sent the proposed long-term plan to Defendant and the United States via e-mail. The Court set action items and a schedule in furtherance of negotiations. Joint motion under seal informing as to the status of all matters addressed during the mediation due by June 18, 2021. Mediation Hearing set for June 24, 2021 at 10:00 AM in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) Modified on 6/22/2021 (mg). (Entered: 05/24/2021)

May 24, 2021

May 24, 2021

PACER

Notice of Docket Text Modification

June 22, 2021

June 22, 2021

PACER

NOTICE of Docket Text Modification by Deputy Clerk re: 36 Minute, Set Hearings. ***Filed in Error- Wrong Entry See Dkt. #37*** (mg)

June 22, 2021

June 22, 2021

PACER
38

**CASE PARTICIPANTS**STATUS REPORT by A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 06/24/2021)

June 24, 2021

June 24, 2021

PACER
39

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: A mediation session was held on June 24, 2021, by VTC before U.S. Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. The Court set the following schedule in furtherance of negotiations: The parties must file a Status Report to inform the Court as to the result of the meeting between Plaintiffs and Defendant by July 15, 2021. By July 26, 2021, Defendant must file an informative motion regarding the outcome of its efforts to engage a contractor specialized in ADA compliance and to retain an ADA Coordinator. By August 20, 2021, Plaintiffs and Defendant will file a joint motion under seal informing the status of all matters as to that date. A further mediation session is scheduled for August 23, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) Modified on 7/1/2021 to edit filing date (rom). (Entered: 06/30/2021)

June 24, 2021

June 24, 2021

PACER
40

Joint Motion In Compliance with Order filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan, Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, A.V.R. and William Rodriguez-Burgos. Responses due by 7/29/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) Modified on 7/16/2021 to add filers (mg). (Entered: 07/15/2021)

July 15, 2021

July 15, 2021

PACER
41

ORDER noted 40 Motion In Compliance. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on July 16, 2021. (Lopez-Soler, Giselle) (Entered: 07/16/2021)

July 16, 2021

July 16, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

July 16, 2021

July 16, 2021

PACER
42

NOTICE of Withdrawal from Participation in Mediation by United States of America (Lewis, Adam) (Entered: 08/11/2021)

Aug. 11, 2021

Aug. 11, 2021

PACER
43

Motion In Compliance with Order filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 9/3/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 08/20/2021)

Aug. 20, 2021

Aug. 20, 2021

PACER
44

ORDER noted 43 Motion In Compliance filed by City of San Juan. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on August 23, 2021. (hgp) (Entered: 08/23/2021)

Aug. 23, 2021

Aug. 23, 2021

PACER
45

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: a Mediation Hearing was held on August 23, 2021 via VTC. By September 22, 2021, Defendant must file an informative motion as to the status of the self-assessment and the grievances procedure, and inform whether the corrective action plan adopted by the MSJ will be available to the public. Within the next twenty (20) days, Plaintiffs will send Defendant a settlement demand, and Defendant must respond on or before October 22, 2021. Further mediation session scheduled for November 5, 2021 at 10:00 a.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) (Entered: 08/23/2021)

Aug. 23, 2021

Aug. 23, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

Aug. 23, 2021

Aug. 23, 2021

PACER
46

Motion In Compliance with docket no. 45 filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 10/6/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) Modified on 9/23/2021 to edit docket text (mg). (Entered: 09/22/2021)

Sept. 22, 2021

Sept. 22, 2021

PACER
47

ORDER noted and granted 46 Motion In Compliance. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 9/23/2021. (NV) (Entered: 09/23/2021)

Sept. 23, 2021

Sept. 23, 2021

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

Sept. 23, 2021

Sept. 23, 2021

PACER
48

ORDER. Due to a calendar conflict, Mediation Hearing is reset for 11/10/2021 at 3:30 PM in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on October 25, 2021. (hgp) (Entered: 10/25/2021)

Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

PACER

~Util - Set Hearings AND Order

Oct. 25, 2021

Oct. 25, 2021

PACER
49

MEMORANDUM OF THE CLERK. This case having been previously assigned to Judge Gustavo A. Gelpi, recently appointed to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, it has been reassigned within the Case Assignment System to the docket of Judge Jay A. Garcia-Gregory. Signed by Clerk on 11/03/2021. (gr) (Entered: 11/03/2021)

Nov. 3, 2021

Nov. 3, 2021

PACER

Memorandum of the Clerk

Nov. 3, 2021

Nov. 3, 2021

PACER
50

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: Mediation Session was held on November 10, 2021 by VTC. Further Mediation Session is scheduled for 12/14/2021 at 3:30 p.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) (Entered: 11/15/2021)

Nov. 10, 2021

Nov. 10, 2021

PACER
51

Emergency MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Ricardo Burgos-Vargas on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 12/3/2021. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Notice of Removal, # 2 Exhibit A, Complaint Translation, # 3 Exhibit B, Attachement Complaint Translation)(Burgos-Vargas, Ricardo) (Entered: 11/19/2021)

Nov. 19, 2021

Nov. 19, 2021

PACER
52

Minute Entry for proceedings held before U.S. Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: Mediation session held on 12/14/2021. Further Mediation session scheduled for 3/3/2022 at 2:30 p.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (NV) (Entered: 12/15/2021)

Dec. 14, 2021

Dec. 14, 2021

PACER
53

RESPONSE in Opposition to Motion filed by A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos Re: 51 Emergency MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by City of San Juan filed by A.V.R., Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon, Virgen Negron-Villegas, William Rodriguez-Burgos. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 12/28/2021)

Dec. 28, 2021

Dec. 28, 2021

PACER
54

MOTION to Strike Gonzlez-Rivera's Motion Opposing the MSJ's Emergency Motion for Consolidation filed by Ricardo Burgos-Vargas on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 1/13/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Burgos-Vargas, Ricardo) Modified on 1/3/2022 to remove italics (gav). (Entered: 12/30/2021)

Dec. 30, 2021

Dec. 30, 2021

PACER
55

RESPONSE to Motion filed by Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon Re: 54 MOTION to Strike Gonzlez-Rivera's Motion Opposing the MSJ's Emergency Motion for Consolidation filed by City of San Juan filed by Faustino Xavier Betancourt-Colon. (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 01/04/2022)

Jan. 4, 2022

Jan. 4, 2022

PACER
56

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: Mediation session held on 3/3/2022 by VTC. Further Mediation Session set for 5/12/2022 at 4:00 p.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) .Modified on 3/28/2022 to replace with corrected minute as per GLS' Chambers(ecc). (Entered: 03/04/2022)

March 3, 2022

March 3, 2022

PACER
57

NOTICE OF IMPASSE by All Plaintiffs (Velez-Colon, Jose) (Entered: 03/22/2022)

March 22, 2022

March 22, 2022

PACER
58

ORDER re 57 Notice of Impasse. Defendant to submit its position within five (5) days. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 3/22/2022. (NV) (Entered: 03/22/2022)

March 22, 2022

March 22, 2022

PACER

Order

March 22, 2022

March 22, 2022

PACER
59

Motion In Compliance as to 58 Order filed by Teichka M. Rodriguez-Munoz on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 4/7/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Related document(s) 58 ) (Rodriguez-Munoz, Teichka) (Entered: 03/24/2022)

March 24, 2022

March 24, 2022

PACER
60

ORDER noted 59 Motion In Compliance. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 3/28/2022. (NV) (Entered: 03/28/2022)

March 28, 2022

March 28, 2022

PACER
61

ORDER re 57 Notice of Impasse. The parties must comply with all the deadlines established by the Court at Docket No. 56. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 3/28/2022. (NV) (Entered: 03/28/2022)

March 28, 2022

March 28, 2022

PACER

Order

March 28, 2022

March 28, 2022

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

March 28, 2022

March 28, 2022

PACER
62

Joint INFORMATIVE Motion regarding in Compliance with Order and Requesting an Extension of Time to Comply with the Order at Docket No. 56 No. 56, MOTION to Continue the Mediation Session filed by Teichka M. Rodriguez-Munoz on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 5/19/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Rodriguez-Munoz, Teichka) Modified on 5/6/2022 to remove all caps(gav). (Entered: 05/05/2022)

May 5, 2022

May 5, 2022

PACER
63

ORDER noted 62 INFORMATIVE Motion in Compliance with order; granting 62 Motion for extension of time. Informative Motion due by 5/27/2022. Mediation session rescheduled for 6/9/2022 at 4:00 p.m. in VTC Bridge GLS before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 5/10/2022. (hgp) (Entered: 05/10/2022)

May 10, 2022

May 10, 2022

PACER

Order on Informative Motion

May 10, 2022

May 10, 2022

PACER
64

Joint MOTION to lift stay, Motion In Compliance filed by Jose Carlos Velez-Colon on behalf of All Plaintiffs and City of San Juan. Responses due by 6/10/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Velez-Colon, Jose) Modified on 5/31/2022 to add filer(gav). (Entered: 05/27/2022)

May 27, 2022

May 27, 2022

RECAP
65

ORDER noted and denied 64 Motion In Compliance. Matters to be addressed at the hearing scheduled for tomorrow. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 6/8/2022. (NV) (Entered: 06/08/2022)

June 8, 2022

June 8, 2022

PACER
66

NOTICE of Request to Participate in Hearing by United States of America (Lewis, Adam) Modified on 6/9/2022 to remove italics (gav). (Entered: 06/08/2022)

June 8, 2022

June 8, 2022

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

June 8, 2022

June 8, 2022

PACER
67

Minute Entry for proceedings held before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler: Mediation Hearing held on 6/9/2022 by VTC. Further Mediation Hearing set for 7/13/2022 at 10:30 a.m. in person in GLS Chambers before US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler. (hgp) Modified on 7/1/2022 to edit hearing information(ecc). (Entered: 06/10/2022)

June 9, 2022

June 9, 2022

RECAP
68

ORDER re 66 Notice (Other) filed by United States of America. The parties have not objected to the participation of the United States of America in the mediation in this case. The United States of America may continue to participate. Nonetheless, the parties and the United States of America are reminded that, pursuant to Local Rule 83J(g), all mediation proceedings are to remain confidential and may not be disclosed for any purpose unrelated to the ongoing mediation process. The Court expects strict compliance with this order and the Local Rules. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on June 10, 2022. (Lopez-Soler, Giselle) (Entered: 06/10/2022)

June 10, 2022

June 10, 2022

PACER

Order

June 10, 2022

June 10, 2022

PACER
69

ORDER denying 54 MOTION to Strike Gonzlez-Rivera's Motion Opposing the MSJ's Emergency Motion for Consolidation; and denying 51 Emergency MOTION to Consolidate Cases. In deciding whether to consolidate two cases, a Court must first determine "whether the two proceedings involve a common party and common issues of fact or law. Once this determination is made, the trial court has broad discretion in weighing the costs and benefits of consolidation to decide whether that procedure is appropriate. A motion for consolidation will usually be granted unless the party opposing it can show 'demonstrable prejudice.'" Seguro de Servicio de Salud de Puerto Rico v. McAuto Sys. Grp., Inc., 878 F.2d 5, 8 (1st Cir. 1989)). While the two cases involve the Municipality of San Juan and share claims pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12134, the Court finds Plaintiffs would suffer a demonstrable prejudice if the case were consolidated with Civil No. 21- 01537. Both cases involve different plaintiffs, different issues, and find themselves at different stages of litigation. While both sets of plaintiffs are "individuals with mobility-related disabilities", Docket No. 55 at 3, and both cases implicate the same laws, the maintenance of public sidewalks and the design, construction, and operating of a coliseum are wholly different issues. As such, consolidating both cases would be prejudicial to the plaintiffs in both cases. Signed by Judge Jay A. Garcia-Gregory on 6/17/2022. (ERC) (Entered: 06/17/2022)

June 17, 2022

June 17, 2022

PACER

Order AND ~Util - Terminate Motions

June 17, 2022

June 17, 2022

PACER

~Util - Terminate Motions AND Order

June 17, 2022

June 17, 2022

PACER
70

Motion In Compliance with Order filed by Raul S. Mariani-Franco on behalf of City of San Juan Responses due by 7/6/2022. NOTE: Pursuant to FRCP 6(a) an additional three days does not apply to service done electronically. (Mariani-Franco, Raul) (Entered: 06/22/2022)

June 22, 2022

June 22, 2022

PACER
71

ORDER noted 70 Motion In Compliance. Signed by US Magistrate Judge Giselle Lopez-Soler on 6/22/2022. (NV) (Entered: 06/22/2022)

June 22, 2022

June 22, 2022

PACER

Order on Motion In Compliance

June 22, 2022

June 22, 2022

PACER
72

NOTICE of Appearance by Paula Rubin filed by Adam F. Lewis on behalf of United States of America (Lewis, Adam) Modified on 7/7/2022 to remove italics (gav). (Entered: 07/06/2022)

July 6, 2022

July 6, 2022

PACER
73

NOTICE of intent to move for continuance by All Plaintiffs re 67 Mediation Hearing,, Set Hearings, (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit I (Email Dated Jul 9, 2022)) (Velez-Colon, Jose) Modified on 7/11/2022 to remove italics (gav). (Entered: 07/09/2022)

July 9, 2022

July 9, 2022

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: Puerto Rico

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Public Accommodations/Contracting

Special Collection(s):

DOJ Civil Rights Division Statements of Interest

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 6, 2019

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All persons with mobility disabilities who use or will use the pedestrian right of way in the City of San Juan

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

City of San Juan (San Juan), City

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General:

Access to public accommodations - governmental

Sidewalks

Discrimination-area:

Accommodation / Leave

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Disability:

Mobility impairment