Uber Technologies Inc must face a lawsuit by a disability advocacy group that its car-hailing app discriminates against people who use wheelchairs in Washington, D.C., a federal judge has ruled.

U.S. District Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in Washington on Monday denied the San Francisco-based company's motion to dismiss the 2017 lawsuit by the Equal Rights Center, a Washington-based nonprofit organization with more than 8,000 members.

Uber and its lawyer Anne Marie Estevez of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Nor did ERC or its lawyer Megan Cacace of Relman Colfax.

ERC sued Uber in June 2017, accusing it of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act and the District of Columbia Human Rights Act by providing "woefully inadequate" service to people who use non-folding wheelchairs.

At the time, the group said, Uber purportedly offered wheelchair-accessible cars through its own Uber WAV service and through TAXI WAV, a service that allowed users to hail D.C. cabs through its app.

In practice, ERC said, there were no Uber WAV vehicles at the time, meaning wheelchair users' only option was TAXI WAV. It said that it conducted comparison tests showing that TAXI WAV customers paid $6.81 more per ride and waited more than 34 minutes longer for a car.

ERC amended the lawsuit in December 2017 to allege that, while Uber WAV cars had become available, customers still waited longer for them than for non-accessible cars.

The group said Uber discouraged drivers from using accessible vehicles by failing to include any in a leasing program via a subsidiary and setting restrictions on vehicles, including at least four passenger seats.

ERC sought an order requiring Uber to implement policies to ensure users of non-folding wheelchairs had equal use of its services, as well as monetary damages.

Uber moved to dismiss the case, arguing that ERC lacked standing to bring a lawsuit without the direct involvement of its members alleging concrete injury. It also said that it was a technology company, not a public transportation company, providing only an app that connected customers to drivers.

Jackson rejected both arguments, finding that for purposes of standing at the pleading stage, the plaintiff "need only show that one ERC member would have downloaded and used the app but for the allegedly unlawful inadequacies in Uber's wheelchair accessible services."

It had met that requirement by including allegations about one member's experiences, she said.

She also said that Uber's control over its drivers and ability to set prices made it "much more than a mere 'conduit' between riders and drivers."

Jackson concluded that ERC had alleged sufficient facts to survive the motion to dismiss, writing it was "plausible that Uber's alleged failure to address policies that may contribute to the purported dearth of wheelchair accessible vehicles in its fleet – such that users who need said vehicles face substantially longer wait times and significantly higher costs – qualifies as conduct that discriminates against persons with disabilities."

The case is Equal Rights Center v. Uber Technologies Inc, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, No. 17-cv-1272.

For Equal Rights Center: Megan Cacace, Michael Allen and Sasha Samberg-Champion of Relman Colfax; Matthew Handley of the Washington Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs

For Uber: Anne Marie Estevez, Beth Joseph, Stephanie Schuster and Clara Kollm of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius