Erkan v. Hidalgo - Standing Defenses and Accessibility Widget Recognition

In Erkan v. Hidalgo, No. 23-CV-9553 (E.D.N.Y. 2025), plaintiff Nihal Erkan, a legally blind New York resident, sued Manhattan plastic surgeon Dr. David Hidalgo alleging the practice's website contained access barriers — ambiguous link text, inaccurate alt text, and inaccessible drop-down menus — that prevented her from independently using it with screen-reading software. On January 23, 2025, Judge Frederic Block of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, finding: - Erkan's allegations regarding her intent to return to the website were too generalized and conclusory to establish a "real and immediate" threat of future injury under Article III standing doctrine. - Mere geographic proximity to the practice did not constitute a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing. - The defendant had voluntarily remediated the website after the lawsuit was filed — implementing improved alt text, clearer navigation labels, and an accessibility widget — which mooted the plaintiff's claim for injunctive relief. The decision is notable as one of a series of recent E.D.N.Y. rulings tightening standing requirements against high-volume "tester" plaintiffs who file numerous boilerplate ADA website complaints. It also expressly recognized an accessibility widget as part of the defendant's remedial response, although the court did not endorse widgets as a standalone substitute for WCAG conformance.