Disabled residents of New Orleans had Article III standing to sue Uber for refusing to make uberWAV (wheelchair accessable rides) available in New Orleans. The residents didn’t have to sign up to use Uber’s app (and thus agree to its arbitration clause) to have Article III standing since doing so would have been a futile gesture. As there was no uberWAV service in New Orleans, there was no way that disabled New Orleans residents could use Uber’s services, whether or not they signed up for the app. This distinguished New Orleans from Chicago, where uberWAV was available and where it would be necessary for the plaintiff to show that despite the availability of the service, he or she couldn’t access it on the same terms as non-disabled persons. Also, the claim satisfied the causation and redressability prongs of standing. Though for uberWAV to work, drivers with wheelchair accessable cars would need to sign up with Uber, the first step was for Uber to offer them that chance. The decision also rejects Uber’s argument that plaintiff should be equitably estopped from avoiding the arbitration agreement that was part of the terms of the Uber app since plaintiff’s claims did not depend on or arise from the app or its terms and conditions.