Lee v. Brooks Brothers
ORDER OF DISMISSAL without prejudice. Case terminated on 10/19/2017 (Signed by Judge Gray H Miller) Parties notified.(rkonieczny, 4)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TIFFANY LE, as legal guardian for
BROOKS BROTHERS, INC.,
October 19, 2017
David J. Bradley, Clerk
CIVIL ACTION H-17-1435
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
On May 9, 2017, Tiffany Le brought this action on behalf of her vision-impaired daughter
against Defendant Brooks Brothers, Inc., alleging that Brooks Brothers violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act (“ADA”) because Brooks Brothers did not take steps to advise consumers of the
limitations in its website concerning the interfacing of universal screen readers, thereby
marginalizing the visually impaired community. Le sought injunctive relief under the ADA, and also
sought damages under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, claiming that Defendant
intercepted her electronic communications by installing software on her computer.
On August 17, 2017, the Magistrate Judge held a scheduling conference with the parties.
After learning that Ms. Le was not an attorney, the court advised Ms. Le that, as a non-lawyer, she
could not represent her daughter pro se. The court ordered Ms. Le to hire an attorney within thirty
days. On September 22, 2017, the Magistrate Judge’s case manager left a message with Ms. Le to
determine if she had hired counsel. Ms. Le did not return the case manager’s phone call.
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), the court may dismiss an action for a plaintiff’s failure to
comply with a court’s order. As of this date, Ms. Le has not hired counsel. She has failed to keep
the court apprised of her intention to pursue this action.
Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Signed at Houston, Texas on October 19, 2017.
Gray H. Miller
United States District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?