Home2 Suites by Hilton litigation history

The franchisor

Pending (2)

• Bow Hospitality LLC v. Hilton Franchise Holding LLC

  pending

  Brought by a franchisee · filed 2025-01-24 · Superior Court of Kent County, Rhode Island · KC-2025-1291

  “On January 24, 2025, the plaintiff filed suit against us alleging breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing under the Rhode Island Dealership Act in connection with our termination of plaintiff’s franchise agreement for the Hampton Inn & Suites Providence/Warwick Airport for failing to comply with Hampton brand standards.”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

• In re: 177 BFP, LLC

  pending

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-08-14 · US Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Penn. · 25-13225-amc

  “On August 14, 2025, we filed a petition in this Chapter 7 bankruptcy action to collect an unpaid judgment against a former Embassy Suites franchisee for amounts past due, liquidated damages, and attorneys’ fees. The Court appointed a trustee on October 7, 2025, and a meeting of the creditors is scheduled for April 8, 2026.”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Concluded (4)

• AAAA Property Partners LLC v. Hilton Franchise Holding LLC

  dismissed

  Brought by a franchisee · filed 2025-01-24 · Orange County, Florida; removed to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida · 6:25-cv-00132-CEM-RMN (state filing No. 215324302)

  “On January 24, 2025, the plaintiff filed suit against us in Orange County, Florida (Filing No. 215324302) alleging breach of contract arising in connection with our termination of plaintiff’s franchise for the Hilton Garden Inn Orlando I-4 Millenia Boulevard Mall.”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “The parties resolved the case on March 5, 2025, by agreeing to terminate the Franchise Agreement as of January 27, 2025, and the plaintiff agreed to dismiss the lawsuit and sell the property within 150 days.”

• Hilton Franchise Holding LLC v. Empower Metro Center LLC

  settled

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-02-28 · Cir. Ct. of Fairfax County, Virginia · CL-2025-0003051

  “On February 28, 2025, we filed a complaint against a former Hampton brand franchisee for damages and fees arising from the early termination of the franchise agreement for failure to commence or complete the construction of the hotel..”Page 24 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On January 14, 2026, the parties agreed to a settlement that was favorable to us and we agreed to dismiss the case.”

• Hilton Franchise Holding LLC v. Portland Hotel Ownership, et al.

  settled

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2020-09-17 · Fairfax County Circuit Court · 2020-14233

  “On September 17, 2020, we filed suit against Portland Hotel Ownership, LLC, a former franchisee of a Curio brand hotel, for breach of contract arising from the early termination of the franchise agreement.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On July 28, 2022, the parties settled this case by agreeing to dismiss all claims and exchange general releases.” (page 23)

• San Pedro Inn, LP v. Hilton Franchise Holding LLC

  settled

  Brought by a franchisee · filed 2019-08-28 · Superior Court of New Jersey Chancery Division General Equity Part, Union County · UNN-C- 121 19

  “On August 28, 2019, plaintiff filed a complaint alleging wrongful termination under the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act. Plaintiff claimed that we imposed unreasonable Quality Assurance standards and that an inspection was hindered by plaintiff’s former employee.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “The parties settled the case on September 25, 2020. The parties agreed to dismiss all claims, exchange general releases, and terminate the franchise on April 28, 2021, without the payment of any termination damages or litigation costs by either party.”

Status not stated in the filing (2)

• Hilton Franchise Holding LLC v. ML Plaza Owner LLC

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2026-02-27 · Cir. Ct. of Fairfax County, Virginia · CL-2026-0003448

  “… (Cir. Ct. of Fairfax County, Virginia), Case No. CL-2026-0003448. On February 27, 2026, we filed a complaint against a former Hilton brand franchisee for amounts past due and liquidated damages arising from the early termination of the franchise agreement for failing to pay monthly fees.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

• Hilton Franchise Holding LLC v. Unique Crowne Hospitality LLC et al.

  Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-08-25 · E.D. Va. · 1:25-cv-01604-MSN-WEF

  “On August 25, 2025, we filed a complaint against a former DoubleTree brand franchisee and its guarantor for damages and fees arising from the early termination of the franchise agreement for failing to comply with DoubleTree brand standards.”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

Parent, affiliates, master franchisor and subfranchisor

Pending (4)

• Hanson Dai v. SAS Institute Inc. (consolidated with Steven Shattuck v. SAS Institute Inc.)

  pending

  Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (“Hilton Worldwide”) · filed 2024-04-26 · United States District Court for the Northern District of California · 4:24-cv-02537 (originally 4:24-cv-02527; Shattuck 4:24-cv-03424)

  “On April 26, 2024, a putative class action complaint captioned Dai v. SAS Institute Inc., Civil Case No. 4:24-cv-02527, was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against Integrated Decisions and Systems, Inc. and SAS Institute, Inc. (together, “IDeaS”) and several hotel defendants, including Hilton Worldwide”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On July 18, 2025, the Court granted the hotel defendants’ motion to dismiss with leave to amend. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 25, 2025.” (page 21)

• In re Extended Stay Hotel Antitrust Litigation (originally Au v. Integrated Decisions and Systems, Inc.; consolidated with Gonzalez v. Integrated Decisions and Systems, Inc.)

  pending

  Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. (“Hilton Worldwide”) · filed 2024-07-24 · United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois; transferred to the Northern District of California · 4:24-civil-09060 (originally 1:24-civil-06324)

  “On July 24, 2024, a putative class action complaint captioned Au v. Integrated Decisions and Systems, Inc., Civil Case No. 1:24-civil-06324, was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against IDeaS, and several hotel defendants, including Hilton Worldwide, asserting alleged violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.”Page 20 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “The hotel defendants filed a motion to dismiss which has been fully briefed and pending before the Court since October 24, 2025. Hilton Worldwide intends to vigorously defend its interests in this matter.”

• Jeanette Portillo, et. al. v. CoStar Group, Inc., et. al.

  pending

  Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.; Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc. substituted as defendant on April 16, 2024 · filed 2024-02-20 · United States District Court for the Western District of Washington · 2:24-cv-00229

  “On February 20, 2024, plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against the CoStar Group, Inc. and its subsidiary STR, Inc., together with several hotel companies including Hilton Worldwide. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants violated the Sherman Act by exchanging competitive data through Smith Travel Research (STR)”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On August 29, 2025, the Court granted the hotel defendants’ motion to dismiss, with leave to amend. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on September 29, 2025.”

• Ryan Segal v. Amadeus IT Group, S.A., et. al.

  pending

  Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.; Hilton Domestic Operating Company, Inc. substituted as defendant on March 25, 2024 · filed 2024-03-01 · United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois · 1:24-civil-01783

  “On March 1, 2024, plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Amadeus IT Group, S.A., Amadeus Hospitality Americas, Inc., and several hotel companies including Hilton Worldwide. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants violated the Sherman Act by agreeing to exchange certain data through Amadeus”Page 21 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “On March 31, 2025, the Court granted the hotel defendants' motion to dismiss finding that Plaintiff failed to allege viable antitrust claims based on information sharing. On April 28, 2025, Plaintiff filed a third Amended Complaint.”

Concluded (3)

• State of Texas v. Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc.

  settled

  Government or regulatory action · Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc. (“Hilton”) · filed 2023-05-23 · District Court of Collin County, Texas · CAUSE NO. 296-02595-2023

  “On May 23, 2023, the plaintiff filed suit against Hilton alleging the violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act in relation to how mandatory guest fees are disclosed to consumers.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “In January 2025, the parties settled the case. Without admitting any fault, Hilton agreed to pay Texas $2.1 million and to disclose, display, and sort guest rooms by their total cost on its hotel reservation websites”

• State of Nebraska v. Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc.

  settled

  Government or regulatory action · Hilton Domestic Operating Company Inc. (“Hilton”) · filed 2019-07-23 · District Court of Lancaster County, Nebraska · D02CI190002366

  “On July 23, 2019, the plaintiff filed suit against Hilton alleging the violations of the Nebraska Consumer Protection Act and Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act in relation to how mandatory guest fees are disclosed to consumers.”Page 22 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3

  Outcome: “In February 2024, without admitting any fault, Hilton entered into a settlement agreement with Plaintiff and agreed to pay $300,000 and clearly disclose all mandatory fees and the total price for a booking.”

• U.S. v. Hilton Hotels Corporation, et al.

  judgment

  Government or regulatory action · Hilton Hotels Corporation (“HHC”) - a former name of Park Hotels & Resorts Inc., a FORMER parent company · filed 1970 · United States District Court, District of Oregon · 70-310

  “On or about May 12, 1970, the United States filed a civil complaint against HHC (among other defendants), alleging the violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act consisting of engaging in a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade by giving preferential treatment to hotel suppliers paying assessments to the Greater Portland Convention Association”Page 23 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3