Summary
finding there was not a showing of a plausible intent to return to the hotel or its website despite a vague allegation stating as such because the plaintiff did not allege why he was intending to visit the hotel, had not visited the website since his original encounter, and did not allege any concrete plans to visit the website or travel to the hotel
Summary of this case from Laufer v. Aark Hosp. HoldingOpinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:19-CV-1170
01-02-2020
PETER STROJNIK, Plaintiff, v. LANDRY'S; dba THE POST OAK HOTEL, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pending before the Court in the above referenced proceeding is Defendant Landry's Inc. d/b/a The Post Oak Hotel's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) for Lack of Article III Standing/Subject Matter Jurisdiction and F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) for Failure to State a Claim upon Which Relief Can be Granted (Doc. No. 8); Plaintiff's Response (Doc. No. 10); Defendant's Reply (Doc. No. 11); and Judge Stacy's Memorandum and Recommendation (Doc. No. 18) that the Court grant the Defendant's Motion. There were no objections filed and the time for doing so has passed.
Upon review, the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that Plaintiff lacks standing to assert an Americans with Disabilities Act claim and has not stated plausible ADA and negligence claims based on the contents of Defendant's hotel's website. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that the Memorandum and Recommendation Doc. No. 18) is ADOPTED. It is further
ORDERED that Defendant Landry's Inc. d/b/a The Post Oak Hotel's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) for Lack of Article III Standing/Subject Matter Jurisdiction and F.R.C.P. 12(b)(6) for Failure to State a Claim upon Which Relief Can be Granted (Doc. No. 8) is GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff's case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Entry of this Order shall constitute entry of Final Judgment.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 2nd day of January 2020.
/s/_________
ANDREW S. HANEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE