Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit February 16, 2011, 09-3964 (Disabled in Action v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority)

JORDAN, Circuit Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I am fully in agreement with the majority’s analysis of the obligations SEPTA has incurred under the ADA and associated regulations by making alterations at the 15th Street Courtyard,1 and, based on the precedential effect of those conclusions, I am strongly inclined to believe that they will compel the further conclusion that