Domino's Pizza
Domino's tried to argue the ADA didn't cover apps. The Supreme Court refused to hear them.
Guillermo Robles wanted to order a pizza. He's blind, and his screen reader couldn't navigate the Domino's website or app — he literally could not customize a pizza or check out. He sued in 2016. Domino's fought back, all the way up to the Supreme Court, arguing that the ADA never mentioned websites or apps, so it shouldn't apply.
The 9th Circuit Court ruled against Domino's in 2019. The Supreme Court then refused to even hear the appeal — meaning the lower court's decision stood. After six years of fighting, Domino's settled. For every business with a website or app today, this is THE case that decides it: if customers use it, it must be accessible.
Court
9th Circuit Court of Appeals (Central District of California at trial level)
Case
Robles v. Domino's Pizza, LLC
17-55504
Outcome
Settled (terms confidential) after six years of litigation
What went wrong on the site
Each visual below shows what visitors with disabilities actually experienced.
<div onClick="buy()">
<div>Buy now</div>
</div>
Custom controls had no ARIA roles, so screen readers could not announce what they were or what state they were in.
WCAG 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
Screen reader announces:
"Image. Image. Image."
Product images and key visuals had no alt text — screen readers announced 'image' or the file name instead of describing what users were looking at.
WCAG 1.1.1 Non-text Content
Click only — Tab key does nothing
Core interactions required a mouse. Keyboard-only users could not navigate menus, complete checkout, or operate widgets.
WCAG 2.1.1 Keyboard
Sources & documentation
Is your site exposed like Domino's's was?
Run a free scan to find out which of these violations exist on your site right now.
Scan my siteAll Restaurants cases
See the full restaurants risk landscape
Other cases, top WCAG failures for restaurants, and what to fix first.
More B2C cases
Retail / E-commerce
Target Corporation
First major e-commerce ADA settlement in U.S. history; established that commercial websites are covered by ADA and class-action exposure is real — Target paid $6M+ in 2008.
Retail / E-commerce
Fashion Nova
Largest disclosed ADA web accessibility class settlement in recent years at $5.15M — and the DOJ intervened in 2026 to argue even this wasn't enough, signaling elevated federal scrutiny.
Streaming
Netflix
Established that the ADA applies to web-only businesses with no physical stores; Netflix paid $795k in fees/monitoring and committed to 100% captioning of its entire streaming library.