Blind and low-vision shoppers who use screen reader software may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Groupon's website denies them equal access in violation of the ADA and the Minnesota Human Rights Act. No class has been certified, the case seeks an injunction rather than payments, and there is nothing to file.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Groupon has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This Lawsuit About?
On September 15, 2026, a proposed class action was filed against Groupon, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, docketed as Dalton v. Groupon, Inc., No. 0:26-cv-04014. The complaint alleges that groupon.com is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or have low vision and who rely on screen reader software, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Minnesota Human Rights Act.The named plaintiff is a Minnesota resident who is legally blind. According to the complaint, she visited the site in August 2026 while shopping for discounted Labor Day activities, tried to open a "Labor Day is Calling" promotion and met narration she describes as nonsensical, confusing and disorienting, which left her unable to shop as intended. A follow-up investigation performed on her behalf is said to have confirmed the experience.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
The Barriers Alleged
The complaint lists six categories of problem said to have been found on the site. None has been tested in court, and Groupon has not responded to them:- Links and buttons whose purpose is not clear from their context or narration, which the complaint says turns navigation into trial and error.
- Narration described as confusing, nonsensical and disorienting.
- A drop-down menu the screen reader does not recognize or read.
- A locations map menu that is likewise unavailable to screen reader users.
- Missing text equivalents for important non-text images.
- Information conveyed only through visual cues, which a screen reader cannot relay.
Who the Proposed Class Would Cover
As pleaded, the class is all people who are blind or have a low-vision disability within the meaning of the ADA, who use screen reader aids to navigate online content, and who have accessed, attempted to access, or may access or attempt to access Groupon's website. It is brought under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2), the subsection written for civil rights cases where a single order about a defendant's conduct resolves the whole class's complaint.No class has been certified. A court deciding certification later could narrow that definition, reject it, or never reach it if the case is resolved first.
Why There Is No Payout Here
ADA Title III does not authorize damages — a plaintiff who wins gets an injunction and attorney's fees. The complaint adds a Minnesota Human Rights Act claim and asks for damages, a damages multiplier, and a civil penalty, but the civil penalty is payable to the State of Minnesota rather than to class members, and a Rule 23(b)(2) class is not a mechanism for distributing individual damages.What the plaintiff actually asks the court to order is a compliance program: an accessibility audit within 90 days, a published digital accessibility policy, a corrective action strategy circulated to executives and contractors, training within 12 months, a named staff member accountable for the policy, vendor contracts requiring WCAG 2.1 Level AA conformance, every published page accessible within 18 months, and ongoing monthly automated scans plus quarterly manual testing by disabled users. If the case succeeds or settles, that is the shape of the result.
This Filing Is One of Many
Groupon is not being singled out. The same plaintiff filed 139 comparable cases in the District of Minnesota during 2025, and roughly twenty more in the month before this complaint — among them Nike, H&M Fashion USA, Marc Jacobs International, Sportsman's Warehouse, iHerb and Untuckit Retail. The pleadings share a structure and a legal theory, with the site-specific details swapped out.That context matters for reading this case, and OCA covers the pattern separately in its explainer on the Minnesota ADA website accessibility lawsuit wave, including why these suits cluster in one district and how they typically end.
What Happens Next
The expected next step is Groupon's response — an answer, or more commonly in these cases a motion to dismiss arguing the plaintiff lacks standing because she did not complete a purchase. The Groupon complaint anticipates that argument by quoting a Minnesota federal judge who rejected it from the bench in an earlier case by the same plaintiff, finding that wanting to look at products and being unable to do so is itself a concrete injury.Nothing on this page changes for readers whichever way it goes: there is no claim window to watch. OCA will update this page if the docket produces a ruling or a settlement worth knowing about.
Questions
Is there a Groupon settlement or payout to claim?
No. This is a complaint filed in September 2026, not a settlement. There is no fund, no administrator, no claim form and no deadline, and the class is pleaded for injunctive relief rather than money, so a payout to class members is not what this case would produce even if the plaintiff wins.
Who would the Groupon class cover?
As pleaded, all blind or low-vision people within the meaning of the ADA who use screen reader software and who have accessed, attempted to access, or may attempt to access Groupon's website. No class has been certified, so that definition is a proposal, not a decision.
What barriers does the complaint describe on Groupon's website?
The complaint alleges links and buttons whose purpose is not clear from their narration, confusing and disorienting screen reader output, a drop-down menu and a locations map the screen reader does not read, missing text equivalents for important images, and information conveyed only by visual cues.
Has Groupon responded to the lawsuit?
Not as of September 20, 2026. The complaint is the only substantive filing on the docket. Groupon has not been found liable of anything, and a response or a motion to dismiss would be the next expected step.
Is this the only lawsuit like this?
No. The same plaintiff filed 139 comparable cases in the District of Minnesota in 2025, and roughly twenty more in the month before this one, against defendants including Nike, H&M, Marc Jacobs and iHerb. The Groupon complaint follows the same template.
Read the Complaint (PDF)
Sources
- Class action complaint, Dalton v. Groupon, Inc. (PDF)
- Docket, Dalton v. Groupon, Inc., No. 0:26-cv-04014 (D. Minn., filed Sept. 15, 2026)
- RECAP docket index — comparable District of Minnesota filings
- Americans with Disabilities Act, Title III (42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.)
- W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 quick reference
