Page 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GREGORY SELDEN
1904 Cedar Street #Richmond, VA Plaintiff, Individually and on
Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated,
Civil Action: 1:16-cv-
v.
AIRBNB, INC.
888 Brannan Street, 4th floor
San Francisco, CA Defendant.
________________________________________________________________________
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Gregory Selden, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, by and through his counsel Emejuru & Nyombi L.L.C, brings this action against
Airbnb., Inc. (“Airbnb”), and states as follows:
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiff maintains that pursuant to FRCP 23, the class is so numerous that joinder
of all members is impracticable, there are questions of law or fact common to the
class; the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims
or defenses of the class; and the representative parties will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class.
2. This action is necessary to protect the civil rights of Plaintiff and all others
similarly situated who have been injured by the pertinent discriminatory acts or
1 Page 2 practices committed by Airbnb’s host agents, representatives, servants of any
type.
3. This action is necessary and increasingly important to protect the civil rights of
Plaintiff’s and all others similarly situated that participate in the “sharing
economy” in which businesses connect people offering goods and services with
other people who want to pay for them.
4. The reason for not joining all potential class members as Plaintiffs is that upon
information and belief, there are thousands of potential plaintiff’s making it
impractical to bring them before the Court. All plaintiffs participate in the sharing
economy, including that of Defendant Airbnb, its agents, representatives,
employees, and/or servants. The discriminatory actions complained of were taken
in the line and scope of such individuals’ employment, agency or representation.
5. There are many persons (approximately in the thousands), both in Plaintiff’s
residential district and in regions surrounding Defendant who are similarly
situated that have been affected and the question to be determined is one of
common and general interest to many persons constituting the Class to which
Plaintiff belongs and the group is so numerous as to make it impracticable to
bring them all before the Court, for which reason Plaintiff initiates this litigation
for all persons similarly situated pursuant to FRCP 23.
6. Issues and questions of law and fact common to the members of the class
predominate over questions affecting individual members and the claims of
Plaintiff’s are typical of the claims of the proposed class. Issues and questions of
law and fact include allegations made upon information and belief of Violation of
2 Page 3 Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Violation of Federal Civil Rights Statute
42 U.S.C. § 1981, Violation of Fair Housing Act.
7. The maintenance of this litigation as a Class Action will be superior to the other
methods of adjudication in promoting the convenient administration of justice.
8. Plaintiff Gregory Selden will fairly and adequately assert and protect the interests
of the Class.
JURISDICTION
9. Personal jurisdiction exists over Defendant as it does business and has the
necessary minimum contacts within the District of Columbia. The defendant has
purposely availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities with in the
District of Columbia and invokes the benefits and protection of the laws of the
District of Columbia.
10. Subject matter jurisdiction exists through diversity jurisdiction pursuant to
28.U.S.C. § 1332 as the action is between citizens of different states and the
amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds seventy-five
thousand dollars ($75,000.00).
11. This Court has jurisdiction over the federal claims asserted here pursuant to the
Class Action Fairness Act, 28, U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) as the matter in controversy
exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, as
members of a class of plaintiffs are citizens of a state different from that of the
Defendant; members of a class of Plaintiff’s is a citizen or subject of a foreign
state, and members of Plaintiff’s class are citizens of a State and the defendant its
citizen or subject of a foreign state.
3 Page 4 12. Federal Question jurisdiction exists because this lawsuit is brought under federal
laws pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331
VENUE
1. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) as Defendant resides and
conducts business in this judicial district and have their principal offices in this
judicial district.
2. Further venue is also proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to
this claim occurred in this judicial district. Mr. Selden made the application for
accommodation with Defendant while physically present in the District of
Columbia.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Gregory Selden is a current resident of Virginia.
2. Defendant Airbnb Inc. (hereinafter “Airbnb”) is a duly registered business
incorporated in the State of California and with its principal offices located at Brannan Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94197.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiff Gregory Selden is a 25 year-old African American [black] male. At the
time of the allegations set forth herein, Mr. Selden was physically present in
Washington DC.
2. In or around March 2015, Plaintiff Gregory Selden planned a trip to go to
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with a friend for a weekend vacation. Prior to
4 Page 5 executing his trip, a friend traveling with Mr. Selden suggested that Mr. Selden
use the housing accommodation service known as Airbnb.
3. The Airbnb platform is accessible through an internet portal and through a mobile
application.
4. In or around March 2015, while at his job in Washington D.C., Mr. Selden signed
up for Airbnb on his mobile device through another mobile application platform,
Facebook. Subsequently, Mr. Selden used the mobile application platform to book
accommodation on the Airbnb platform.
5. As a young global traveler, Mr. Selden understood that the platform was a
cheaper option amongst the other competitive public accommodation operations
in the United States.
6. Mr. Selden’s Airbnb platform profile included his face as well as other details
such as his name, education, sex, age and residential location.
7. For the first time, Mr. Selden attempted to use the online sharing platform for
public accommodation in or around March 2015.
8. Airbnb agents or employees, representatives or servants are classified specifically
as Airbnb “Hosts” for the web based sharing platform
9. In or around March 2015, the Defendant’s Host agent’s public accommodation
listing included favorable dates available for Mr. Selden in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
10. In or around March 2015, Mr. Selden inquired about the availability of a
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania accommodation from [a person listed with a Screen
5 Page 6 name Paul] an Airbnb Host agent, representative or employee. Mr. Selden sought
to obtain the accommodation from the agent or employee.
11. In or about March 2015, Mr. Selden heard back from the Host agent rejecting his
request for the vacation accommodation. The Host agent indicated that the
accommodation was not available.
12. Soon after and on the same day he was rejected by the Airbnb agent or employee,
Mr. Selden stumbled across the same listing by Paul the Airbnb agent or
employee indicating that the accommodation on the platform was still available.
This is despite the fact that the Airbnb agent or employee told Mr. Selden that the
accommodation was not available.
13. With the belief that he was discriminated against because of his race, Mr. Selden
created two imitation Airbnb profiles in order to seek accommodation once again
for the same Host agent or employee listing that previously rejected him.
14. The first imitation profile created by Selden was named “Jessie.” Jessie was
created with similar demographics as Selden. However, the race of the imitation
profile was white. From the Host agents view, only Jessie’s name, profile picture,
location and how long the imitation had been a member of the Airbnb community
(since March 2015) were visible.
15. The second imitation profile created by Selden was named Todd. Todd was an
older white male and no education information was entered for him. Only Todd’s
name, profile picture, location and how long the imitation had been a member of
the Airbnb community (since March 2015) were visible.
6 Page 7 16. Selden used the two imitation profiles to request accommodations for the exact
same dates and from the exact same Airbnb Host agent that rejected him.
17. Subsequently, and on the same day in March 2015, the same Airbnb Host agent
that originally rejected Selden immediately accepted both of the white imitation
Airbnb accounts.
18. Selden contacted Airbnb indicating to the entity that its Host agent or employee
discriminated against him because he was African American, but Airbnb did not
respond.
19. Subsequently, Mr. Selden confronted Paul the Airbnb Host agent regarding the
discrimination. However, the Airbnb host agent merely shamed Selden for
speaking out against the intentional discriminatory act. Specifically, the Host
agent stated that Mr. Selden or “people like [him] were simply victimizing
[himself].”
20. As to his vacation, Mr. Selden inconvenienced by the denial, ended up staying at
a hotel for a higher price than the Airbnb accommodation he originally sought.
Upon information and belief the same injury has been suffered by persons
similarly situated to Mr. Selden.
21. Defendant’s host had no legitimate reason for denying Mr. Selden
accommodation. Any asserted reasons were a pretext for discrimination.
22. Selden continued to contact Airbnb through March 2015. However, his cries to
Airbnb would fall on deaf ear.
23. Mr. Selden took his complaint of discrimination to twitter, which accelerated the
viral hashtag titled “#airbnbwhileblack.” Upon information and belief, there have
7 Page 8 been thousands of retweets from individuals who experienced the exact same
disparate treatment from Airbnb Host agents, representatives, servants or
employees.
COUNT VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 24. Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly prohibits discrimination in
places of public accommodation, such as hotels, restaurants, movie theatres and
sports arenas.
25. Airbnb is an establishment affecting interstate commerce or supported in their
activities by the State as places of public accommodation and lodgings.
26. Specifically, Airbnb is an inn, hotel, motel or other establishment which provides
lodging to transient guests.
27. Plaintiff Gregory Selden was denied full and equal enjoyment of the goods,
services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of the public
accommodation as defined in §2000a of this count because of his race as an
African American. The same discriminatory actions have been unleashed on
persons who are similarly situated to Plaintiffs.
28. WHEREFORE, for the claim of Violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, Plaintiff, individually, and on behalf of others prays for judgment against
Defendant for all damages allowable by law, including injunctive, statutory
damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest at the
legal rate, post-judgment interest at the judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be
8 Page 9 awarded by the Court, the costs of this action, equitable relief, and such other and
further relief as may appear warranted by this action.
COUNT II
VIOLATION OF FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTE 42 U.S.C. § 29. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all paragraphs of this Complaint as though
fully stated herein seriatim
30. By the above acts, Defendant violated 42 U.S.C § 1981 by discriminating against
Mr. Selden individually and others similarly situated because of his race as an
African American[black].
31. Section 1981 guarantees freedom from racial discrimination in the making,
enforcement performance, modification, and termination of contracts.
32. Section 1981 also guarantees enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and
conditions of the contractual relationship.
33. Plaintiff’s use of the Airbnb service for housing accommodation falls under
section 1981 protection.
34. Airbnb’s agent or employee refused to provide rental accommodations to Plaintiff
because he was African American.
35. Airbnb’s agent, representative, servant or employee Hosts purposefully and
intentionally discriminated against Plaintiff because he was an African American
by race. Any reasons given by Defendant’s agent Airbnb host were a mere pretext
for discrimination.
36. WHEREFORE, for the claim of violation of Federal Civil Rights Statute U.S.C.§ 1981, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of others prays for judgment
9 Page 10 against Defendant for all damages allowable by law, including injunctive relief,
statutory damages, unlimited compensatory damages, punitive damages, prejudgment interest at the legal rate, post-judgment interest at the judgment rate,
attorney's fees as may be awarded by the Court, the costs of this action, equitable
relief, and such other and further relief as may appear warranted by this action.
COUNT III
VIOLATION OF FAIR HOUSING ACT
37. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all paragraphs of this Complaint as though
fully stated herein seriatim.
38. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discriminatory practices on the basis of race by
housing agents for rental accommodation.
39. Specifically, the Airbnb agent was not truthful in disclosing information
concerning the availability of housing. Any reasons given by Defendant’s agent
were a mere pretext for discrimination.
40. Plaintiff was the object of a misrepresentation made unlawful under the Fair
Housing Act and suffered the precise injury the statute was designed to guard
against.
41. WHEREFORE, for the claim of violation of the Fair Housing Act, Plaintiff,
individually and on behalf of others prays for judgment against Defendant for all
damages
allowable
by
law,
including
injunctive,
statutory
damages,
compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest at the legal rate,
post-judgment interest at the judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be awarded by
10 Page 11 the Court, the costs of this action, equitable relief, and such other and further
relief as may appear warranted by this action.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Selden, and on behalf of all others prays for
judgment in his favor and against Defendant Airbnb for: any and all damages
acceptable by law, including compensatory damages, statutory damages, punitive
damages, pre-judgment interest at the legal rate, post-judgment interest at the
judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be awarded by the Court, the costs of this
action, equitable relief, relief pleaded in the preceding paragraphs, injunctive
relief and such other and further relief as Plaintiff may be entitled to by bringing
this action.
JURY DEMAND
PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY IN THIS CASE
Respectfully submitted on this 20th day of May 2016.
EMEJURU & NYOMBI LLC
By: / s / Ikechukwu Emejuru______________
Ikechukwu “Ike” Emejuru, Esq, Bar No. Andrew Nyombi, Esq, MDEmejuru & Nyombi L.L.C.
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
8403 Colesville Road
Suite Silver Spring, MD Telephone: (240) 638 – Facsimile: 1-800-250-iemejuru@enylaw.com
anyombi@enylaw.com
11 Page 12 Attorneys for Plaintiff Individually and others similarly situated
12
PDF Page 1
PlainSite Cover Page
PDF Page 2
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 1 of 12
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
GREGORY SELDEN
1904 Cedar Street #413
Richmond, VA 23223
Plaintiff, Individually and on
Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated,
Civil Action: 1:16-cv-00933
v.
AIRBNB, INC.
888 Brannan Street, 4th floor
San Francisco, CA 94197
Defendant.
________________________________________________________________________
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Gregory Selden, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, by and through his counsel Emejuru & Nyombi L.L.C, brings this action against
Airbnb., Inc. (“Airbnb”), and states as follows:
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiff maintains that pursuant to FRCP 23, the class is so numerous that joinder
of all members is impracticable, there are questions of law or fact common to the
class; the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims
or defenses of the class; and the representative parties will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class.
2. This action is necessary to protect the civil rights of Plaintiff and all others
similarly situated who have been injured by the pertinent discriminatory acts or
1
PDF Page 3
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 2 of 12
practices committed by Airbnb’s host agents, representatives, servants of any
type.
3. This action is necessary and increasingly important to protect the civil rights of
Plaintiff’s and all others similarly situated that participate in the “sharing
economy” in which businesses connect people offering goods and services with
other people who want to pay for them.
4. The reason for not joining all potential class members as Plaintiffs is that upon
information and belief, there are thousands of potential plaintiff’s making it
impractical to bring them before the Court. All plaintiffs participate in the sharing
economy, including that of Defendant Airbnb, its agents, representatives,
employees, and/or servants. The discriminatory actions complained of were taken
in the line and scope of such individuals’ employment, agency or representation.
5. There are many persons (approximately in the thousands), both in Plaintiff’s
residential district and in regions surrounding Defendant who are similarly
situated that have been affected and the question to be determined is one of
common and general interest to many persons constituting the Class to which
Plaintiff belongs and the group is so numerous as to make it impracticable to
bring them all before the Court, for which reason Plaintiff initiates this litigation
for all persons similarly situated pursuant to FRCP 23.
6. Issues and questions of law and fact common to the members of the class
predominate over questions affecting individual members and the claims of
Plaintiff’s are typical of the claims of the proposed class. Issues and questions of
law and fact include allegations made upon information and belief of Violation of
2
PDF Page 4
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 3 of 12
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Violation of Federal Civil Rights Statute
42 U.S.C. § 1981, Violation of Fair Housing Act.
7. The maintenance of this litigation as a Class Action will be superior to the other
methods of adjudication in promoting the convenient administration of justice.
8. Plaintiff Gregory Selden will fairly and adequately assert and protect the interests
of the Class.
JURISDICTION
9. Personal jurisdiction exists over Defendant as it does business and has the
necessary minimum contacts within the District of Columbia. The defendant has
purposely availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities with in the
District of Columbia and invokes the benefits and protection of the laws of the
District of Columbia.
10. Subject matter jurisdiction exists through diversity jurisdiction pursuant to
28.U.S.C. § 1332 as the action is between citizens of different states and the
amount in controversy, exclusive of interest and costs, exceeds seventy-five
thousand dollars ($75,000.00).
11. This Court has jurisdiction over the federal claims asserted here pursuant to the
Class Action Fairness Act, 28, U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) as the matter in controversy
exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, as
members of a class of plaintiffs are citizens of a state different from that of the
Defendant; members of a class of Plaintiff’s is a citizen or subject of a foreign
state, and members of Plaintiff’s class are citizens of a State and the defendant its
citizen or subject of a foreign state.
3
PDF Page 5
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 4 of 12
12. Federal Question jurisdiction exists because this lawsuit is brought under federal
laws pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331
VENUE
1. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) as Defendant resides and
conducts business in this judicial district and have their principal offices in this
judicial district.
2. Further venue is also proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to
this claim occurred in this judicial district. Mr. Selden made the application for
accommodation with Defendant while physically present in the District of
Columbia.
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Gregory Selden is a current resident of Virginia.
2. Defendant Airbnb Inc. (hereinafter “Airbnb”) is a duly registered business
incorporated in the State of California and with its principal offices located at 888
Brannan Street, 4th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94197.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiff Gregory Selden is a 25 year-old African American [black] male. At the
time of the allegations set forth herein, Mr. Selden was physically present in
Washington DC.
2. In or around March 2015, Plaintiff Gregory Selden planned a trip to go to
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with a friend for a weekend vacation. Prior to
4
PDF Page 6
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 5 of 12
executing his trip, a friend traveling with Mr. Selden suggested that Mr. Selden
use the housing accommodation service known as Airbnb.
3. The Airbnb platform is accessible through an internet portal and through a mobile
application.
4. In or around March 2015, while at his job in Washington D.C., Mr. Selden signed
up for Airbnb on his mobile device through another mobile application platform,
Facebook. Subsequently, Mr. Selden used the mobile application platform to book
accommodation on the Airbnb platform.
5. As a young global traveler, Mr. Selden understood that the platform was a
cheaper option amongst the other competitive public accommodation operations
in the United States.
6. Mr. Selden’s Airbnb platform profile included his face as well as other details
such as his name, education, sex, age and residential location.
7. For the first time, Mr. Selden attempted to use the online sharing platform for
public accommodation in or around March 2015.
8. Airbnb agents or employees, representatives or servants are classified specifically
as Airbnb “Hosts” for the web based sharing platform
9. In or around March 2015, the Defendant’s Host agent’s public accommodation
listing included favorable dates available for Mr. Selden in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
10. In or around March 2015, Mr. Selden inquired about the availability of a
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania accommodation from [a person listed with a Screen
5
PDF Page 7
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 6 of 12
name Paul] an Airbnb Host agent, representative or employee. Mr. Selden sought
to obtain the accommodation from the agent or employee.
11. In or about March 2015, Mr. Selden heard back from the Host agent rejecting his
request for the vacation accommodation. The Host agent indicated that the
accommodation was not available.
12. Soon after and on the same day he was rejected by the Airbnb agent or employee,
Mr. Selden stumbled across the same listing by Paul the Airbnb agent or
employee indicating that the accommodation on the platform was still available.
This is despite the fact that the Airbnb agent or employee told Mr. Selden that the
accommodation was not available.
13. With the belief that he was discriminated against because of his race, Mr. Selden
created two imitation Airbnb profiles in order to seek accommodation once again
for the same Host agent or employee listing that previously rejected him.
14. The first imitation profile created by Selden was named “Jessie.” Jessie was
created with similar demographics as Selden. However, the race of the imitation
profile was white. From the Host agents view, only Jessie’s name, profile picture,
location and how long the imitation had been a member of the Airbnb community
(since March 2015) were visible.
15. The second imitation profile created by Selden was named Todd. Todd was an
older white male and no education information was entered for him. Only Todd’s
name, profile picture, location and how long the imitation had been a member of
the Airbnb community (since March 2015) were visible.
6
PDF Page 8
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 7 of 12
16. Selden used the two imitation profiles to request accommodations for the exact
same dates and from the exact same Airbnb Host agent that rejected him.
17. Subsequently, and on the same day in March 2015, the same Airbnb Host agent
that originally rejected Selden immediately accepted both of the white imitation
Airbnb accounts.
18. Selden contacted Airbnb indicating to the entity that its Host agent or employee
discriminated against him because he was African American, but Airbnb did not
respond.
19. Subsequently, Mr. Selden confronted Paul the Airbnb Host agent regarding the
discrimination. However, the Airbnb host agent merely shamed Selden for
speaking out against the intentional discriminatory act. Specifically, the Host
agent stated that Mr. Selden or “people like [him] were simply victimizing
[himself].”
20. As to his vacation, Mr. Selden inconvenienced by the denial, ended up staying at
a hotel for a higher price than the Airbnb accommodation he originally sought.
Upon information and belief the same injury has been suffered by persons
similarly situated to Mr. Selden.
21. Defendant’s host had no legitimate reason for denying Mr. Selden
accommodation. Any asserted reasons were a pretext for discrimination.
22. Selden continued to contact Airbnb through March 2015. However, his cries to
Airbnb would fall on deaf ear.
23. Mr. Selden took his complaint of discrimination to twitter, which accelerated the
viral hashtag titled “#airbnbwhileblack.” Upon information and belief, there have
7
PDF Page 9
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 8 of 12
been thousands of retweets from individuals who experienced the exact same
disparate treatment from Airbnb Host agents, representatives, servants or
employees.
COUNT 1
VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1964
24. Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly prohibits discrimination in
places of public accommodation, such as hotels, restaurants, movie theatres and
sports arenas.
25. Airbnb is an establishment affecting interstate commerce or supported in their
activities by the State as places of public accommodation and lodgings.
26. Specifically, Airbnb is an inn, hotel, motel or other establishment which provides
lodging to transient guests.
27. Plaintiff Gregory Selden was denied full and equal enjoyment of the goods,
services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of the public
accommodation as defined in §2000a of this count because of his race as an
African American. The same discriminatory actions have been unleashed on
persons who are similarly situated to Plaintiffs.
28. WHEREFORE, for the claim of Violation of Title II of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, Plaintiff, individually, and on behalf of others prays for judgment against
Defendant for all damages allowable by law, including injunctive, statutory
damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest at the
legal rate, post-judgment interest at the judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be
8
PDF Page 10
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 9 of 12
awarded by the Court, the costs of this action, equitable relief, and such other and
further relief as may appear warranted by this action.
COUNT II
VIOLATION OF FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS STATUTE 42 U.S.C. § 1981
29. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all paragraphs of this Complaint as though
fully stated herein seriatim
30. By the above acts, Defendant violated 42 U.S.C § 1981 by discriminating against
Mr. Selden individually and others similarly situated because of his race as an
African American[black].
31. Section 1981 guarantees freedom from racial discrimination in the making,
enforcement performance, modification, and termination of contracts.
32. Section 1981 also guarantees enjoyment of all benefits, privileges, terms, and
conditions of the contractual relationship.
33. Plaintiff’s use of the Airbnb service for housing accommodation falls under
section 1981 protection.
34. Airbnb’s agent or employee refused to provide rental accommodations to Plaintiff
because he was African American.
35. Airbnb’s agent, representative, servant or employee Hosts purposefully and
intentionally discriminated against Plaintiff because he was an African American
by race. Any reasons given by Defendant’s agent Airbnb host were a mere pretext
for discrimination.
36. WHEREFORE, for the claim of violation of Federal Civil Rights Statute 42
U.S.C.§ 1981, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of others prays for judgment
9
PDF Page 11
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 10 of 12
against Defendant for all damages allowable by law, including injunctive relief,
statutory damages, unlimited compensatory damages, punitive damages, prejudgment interest at the legal rate, post-judgment interest at the judgment rate,
attorney's fees as may be awarded by the Court, the costs of this action, equitable
relief, and such other and further relief as may appear warranted by this action.
COUNT III
VIOLATION OF FAIR HOUSING ACT
37. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all paragraphs of this Complaint as though
fully stated herein seriatim.
38. The Fair Housing Act prohibits discriminatory practices on the basis of race by
housing agents for rental accommodation.
39. Specifically, the Airbnb agent was not truthful in disclosing information
concerning the availability of housing. Any reasons given by Defendant’s agent
were a mere pretext for discrimination.
40. Plaintiff was the object of a misrepresentation made unlawful under the Fair
Housing Act and suffered the precise injury the statute was designed to guard
against.
41. WHEREFORE, for the claim of violation of the Fair Housing Act, Plaintiff,
individually and on behalf of others prays for judgment against Defendant for all
damages
allowable
by
law,
including
injunctive,
statutory
damages,
compensatory damages, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest at the legal rate,
post-judgment interest at the judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be awarded by
10
PDF Page 12
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 11 of 12
the Court, the costs of this action, equitable relief, and such other and further
relief as may appear warranted by this action.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Gregory Selden, and on behalf of all others prays for
judgment in his favor and against Defendant Airbnb for: any and all damages
acceptable by law, including compensatory damages, statutory damages, punitive
damages, pre-judgment interest at the legal rate, post-judgment interest at the
judgment rate, attorney's fees as may be awarded by the Court, the costs of this
action, equitable relief, relief pleaded in the preceding paragraphs, injunctive
relief and such other and further relief as Plaintiff may be entitled to by bringing
this action.
JURY DEMAND
PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY IN THIS CASE
Respectfully submitted on this 20th day of May 2016.
EMEJURU & NYOMBI LLC
By: / s / Ikechukwu Emejuru______________
Ikechukwu “Ike” Emejuru, Esq, Bar No. 19262
Andrew Nyombi, Esq, MD0010
Emejuru & Nyombi L.L.C.
Attorneys and Counselors at Law
8403 Colesville Road
Suite 1100
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: (240) 638 – 2786
Facsimile: 1-800-250-7923
iemejuru@enylaw.com
anyombi@enylaw.com
11
PDF Page 13
Case 1:16-cv-00933-CRC Document 6 Filed 05/20/16 Page 12 of 12
Attorneys for Plaintiff Individually and others similarly situated
12
Back to 
