Case

Document 1 ,-1 Filed

Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ECF CASE

4482

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

Civil Action No. COMPLAINT

Plaintiff,
v.

FiL
u,s, ~ON G,L~SRKT’,5Rt:,FIRFCTICE~E.D.Nc,Y~.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

SEP 2 i 2005 ~

JAPANESE FOOD SOLUTIONS, INC~..BROOKLY/ OFFICE

(d/b/a MINADO RESTAURANT),

.

Defendant.

:

J. ORENSTEIN, M.J.

NATURE OF THEACTION This is an action under Title VII of the CivilgRhts Act of 1964, as amended, and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawfutlpelnoyment practices on the basis of national origin and to provide appropriate relief to Zuo Zhlo_u.in and a class of similarly situated employees of Chinese descent adversely affected sbyach practices. As alleged with greater particularity in paragraph seven (7) below, DefendaJanptanese Food Solutions, Inc. (d/b/a Minado Restaurant) (hereinafter "Minado") engagendniational origin discrimination against Zuo Zhou Lin and a class of similarly situated empeleos3of Chinese descent by maintaining an English-only Rule which was enforced only againnstpelol yees of Chinese descent and by otherwise discriminating against them in regard toirthterms, conditions or privileges of employment, all in violation of Title VII.

Case

Document 1,-1 Filed

Page 2 of 6

JURISDICTIOI~ AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked p’suulant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pauatnst to Sections 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S3..(§§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII") and pursuant to Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1q9,4!2U.S.C. § 1981a. 2. The unlawful employment practiceaslleged below were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for Ethaestern District of New York.
PARTIE~ 3. Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opport.utyn Commission (hereinafter "EEOC" or "the Commission"), is an agency of the United StatesAoml erica charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement of Title VII and xispressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§~000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Minado has conatuiously been a corporation doing business in the State of New York and the county of Nassau, and has continuously had at least fifteen employees. 5. At all relevant times, Minado has co~Ltinuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of ~lections 701Co), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g), and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the in;sutition of this lawsuit, Zuo Zhou Lin filed a charge with the Commission alleging viola~tsioorf Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have beieanlfilled.

Case

Document 1,-1 Filed 09/0005 Page 3 of 6

7. Since at least May 2003, Defendant hae: ngaged in unlawful employment practices in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII,U4.:S.C. § 2000e. These practices include, but are not limited to, the following:
a) Defendant instituted an unlawdfiEnglish-only/No-Chinese Language Rule in the restaurant;
b) Defendant’s management reper~edly instructed Zuo Zhou Lin and a class
of similarly situated employeoefs Chinese descent not to speak in Chinese, and to only speak in t~nglish at all times in the restaurant;
c) Defendant’s enforcement of th~English-only/No-Chinese Language Rule
constitutes disparate treatmen~t f employees of Chinese descent;
d) Defendant permitted employeeof non-Chinese descent, including but not
limited to Hispanics and Kore~as, to speak in languages other than English and Chinese in all areas of the’estaurant;
e) Defendant’s English-only Launalge Rule was not justified by
business necessity and had an.dverse disparate impact on employees of Chinese descent; Defendant’s management repeLtedly harassed the employees of Chinese descent based on their nationaolrigin. For example, a manager would yell at the Chinese employeeso~"Stop fuckin’ speaking Chineset";
g) Defendant’s management repet~tedly made derogatory statements in
Chinese. One such comment ,r0as "Fuck your mother’s pussy!" (Translated in English);

Case 2:05-cv-O4482-LO-J 0 Document 1,-1 Filed

Page 4 of 6

h) Defendant’s management woutlhreaten the Chinese employees with
termination if they spoke Chinse by saying, "One word and you’re fired!";
i) Defendant’s non-managemen~t mployees of non-Chinese descent
repeatedly harassed the emplo3,~es of Chinese descent based on their national origin. Some exampleinclude, but are not limited to, employees shouting, "Fuckin’ Chinese-ch~~p, cheap, cheap" and "Your group are stupid-Speak English!"; and
J) Defendant also retaliated agaitnt the employees of Chinese descent when
they complained about the Enfgish-only Language Rule and the unequal treatment. The retaliatory actisnclude, but are not limited to reducing work hours, assigninlgess favorable shifts, and disparately scrutinizing work, and terminaio~n. 8. The effect of the practices complaineodf above has been to deprive Zuo Zhou Lin and a class of similarly situated employees of Chindeess,cent of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their sttsaats employees because of their national origin. 9. The unlawful employment practices ,cm¢plained of above were intentional. 10. At all relevant times, Defendant hastead( with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights ofZuo Zhou Lin andlascs of similarly situated employees of Chinese descent.

Case

Document 1,-1 Filed

Page 5 of 6

PRAYER FOR 1~ELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully req~ut(s that this Court: A. Grant apermanent injunction enjoininheg Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation wIihthem, from engaging in any employment practices that discriminate on the basi~s onational origin; B. Order the Defendant to institute and ctray out policies, practices mad programs that provide equal employment opportunities for all em~pykees, regardless of national origin, and that eradicate the effects of Defendant’s past and presentn~la:wful employment practices; C. Order the Defendant to make whole aIlthose individuals affected by the unlawful employment practices described above, by providincogmpensation for past and future pecuniary losses in anaounts to be determined at trial; D. Order the Defendant to make whole a1lthose individuals affected by the unlawful employment practices described above, by provid.gircompensation for non-pecuniary losses, including pain, suffering and humiliation, in amotounbtesdetermined at trial; E. Order the Defendant to provide punit,ie, damages for its malicious and/or reckless conduct, in amounts to be determined at trial; F. Grant such further relief as the Courtedems necessary and proper; G. Award the Commission its costs in thia..ction,

JURY TRIAL D]:MAND The Commission requests a jury trial on alleqsttions of fact raised by its Complaint.
Dated: New York, New York September 22, 2005 5

Case

Document 1,-1 Filed

Page 6 of 6

Respectfally submitted,
James L. Lee Deputy }eneral Counsel
Gwendolyn Young Reams Associaty General Counsel
EQUAL[ EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L ~treet, N.W. Wa~hin~lton, D.C. 2~0507
Elizabeth Grossman Acting lq.egional AttOrney

Supervis ory Trial Attorr~y
~mada ./
I rlal/-kiIomey
New Yo :k District Office 33 Whit,~hall Street, 5th Floor New Yo :k, New York 10004 Phone: 12-336-3706 Fax: 21 -336-3623

 
 Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------}(
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAPANESE FOOD SOLUTIONS, INC. (d/b/a MINADO RESTAURANT),

ECF
Civil Action No: 05 CV 4482 (LDW) (AKT)

Defendant.
--------------------------------------------------------}(
CONSENT DECREE This cause of action was initiated on September 22, 2005, by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") alleging that Japanese Food Solutions, Inc.(d/b/a Minado Restaurant) ("Defendant") engaged in unlawful employment practices on the basis of national origin in violation of Title Vll the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"). EEOC alleged that Defendant engaged in national origin discrimination against Zuo Zhou Lin and a class of similarly situated employees of Chinese descent by maintaining an English-only Rule which was enforced only against employees of Chinese descent and by otherwise discriminating against them in regard to their terms, conditions or privileges of emploYment, all in violation of Title Vll. Defendant specifically denies any and all allegations of wrongful acts against Zuo Zhou Lin or any other employee on the part of itself, its employees or agents.

I

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 2 of 9

The Parties agree that it is in their mutual interests to fully resolve the matter without

further litigation. In consideration of the mutual promises, agreements and consideration

contained herein, EEOC and Defendant do hereby stipulate and consent to the entry of this

Decree as final and binding between the Parties and any entity that acquires Defendant or into

which Defendant is merged or consolidated.

This Decree resolves the national origin discrimination and retaliation claims presented

by EEOC's Complaint and Charge Nos. 160-2005-01440 and 160-2005-02794. This Decree in

no way affects EEOC's right to process any future charges that may be filed against Defendant,

including a charge filed by a member of the Commission and to commence civil actions on any

such charges. Breach of any term of this Decree should be deemed to be a substantive breach of

this Decree. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to preclude EEOC from bringing

proceedings to enforce this Decree in the event that Defendant fails to perform any of the

promises and representations contained herein.

The Parties agree that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and

the Parties for the duration of this Decree, that venue is proper, and that all administrative

prerequisites have been met. The Parties further agree that this Decree may be entered without

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law having been made and entered by the Court.

1.

In consideration of the mutual promises of each party to this Decree, the

sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, it is agreed and IT IS ORDERED,

ADJUDGED, AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: Defendant and its agents are enjoined

from discriminating against any employee or applicant because of his or her national

origin, including, but not limited to: refusing to hire an applicant because of his or her

2

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 3 of 9
national origin, subjecting an employee to harassment because ofhis or her national origin, subjecting an employee to an English Language Policy and reducing an employee's work hours or assigning an employee less favorable shifts because ofhis or her national origin. Additionally, Defendant and its agents are enjoined from retaliating against any employee or applicant who complains of discrimination or cooperates with an investigation of a discrimination complaint. 2. Defendant shall pay a total of $130,000 ("Monetary Amount") to Zuo Zhou Lin and a class of similarly situated employees of Chinese descent ("Claimants") whose members are determined and identified by EEOC. The EEOC shall notify Defendant by letter the names of the Claimants,including their addresses and individual amounts, within 45 days of the date of the beginning of the publication announcement ofthe Legal Notice addressed in paragraph three (3) below. No part of this Monetary Amount shall be spent on the costs of implementing this Decree or for any other injunctive relief put forth in this Decree. Defendants shall deliver checks to the Claimants within ten (10) business days of receiving the letter by the EEOC. Defendant shall provide Claimants with a Form 1099 for compensatory damages and a W2 for backpay damages. Backpay damage payments shall be in the form of net checks subject to all required payroll withholdings. Defendants shall also provide EEOC copies of all checks, within five (5) days of the mailing of the checks to the Claimants. 3. Within forty-five (45) business days of entry of the consent decree, EEOC shall arrange for the pUblication of the Legal Notice set forth as Exhibit A in the following media outlets: World Journal, Ming Pao Daily News and WZRC AM radio station. The Legal
3

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 4 of 9
~
Notice shall assist EEOC in identifying the class of similarly situated employees of Chinese descent who claim they have been discriminated against and are a part of this lawsuit. Defendant agrees to contribute to the publication costs of the Legal Notice in a total amount not to exceed $3983.90 within ten (10) business days of receiving copies of invoices for same from the EEOC. World Journal and Ming Pao shall publicize the Legal Notice for two consecutive weeks; World Journal on Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday, and Mao Pao from Friday to Sunday. WZRC AM shall publicly announce the Legal Notice twice a day for five (5) consecutive days. 4. Defendant shall rescind its English Language Policy and will advise all employees of the rescission through the Notice attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, Defendant will post this Notice in employee break areas and places where employee notices are posted for the duration of this Decree. 5. Within two (2) months ofthe date of entry of this Decree and once each calendar year thereafter, Defendant shall provide a two (2) hour anti-discrimination training for all staff and one (1) additional hour for management personnel, to be conducted by The Bar Fly Group, an outside trainer approved by EEOC. This training shall at a minimum cover the following: (a) a summary of the laws governing retaliation and discrimination on the basis of national origin, sex, race, religion, color, age, and disability; (b) examples of conduct prohibited under the applicable laws and Defendant's anti-discrimination policies; (c) case studies covering a variety of scenarios and a question/answer session; and (d) a summary of the procedures and policies that Defendant has instituted to prevent all forms of discrimination, including procedures regarding receiving, documenting and
4

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 5 of 9
investigating claims of discrimination. Defendant shall forward to EEOC a summary of the topics covered and a copy ofthe attendance sheet(s) within ten {lO) days of the completion of the training program. 6. Within five (5) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall post and maintain, in employee break areas and places where employee notices are posted, the notice of nondiscrimination attached as Exhibit B. 7. Within five (5) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall adopt the nondiscrimination policy and complaint procedure attached as Exhibit C and disseminate it to all its employees. 8. Defendant shall maintain any and all record of any complaint of discrimination or retaliation for the duration of this Decree. Additionally, Defendant shall maintain any and all record of an investigation and resolution of any such complaint of discrimination or retaliation for the duration of this Decree. 9. Upon three business days' notice by EEOC, Defendant shall make available any person within its employ whom EEOC requests and identifies for purposes of verifying compliance with this Decree and shall permit a representative of EEOC to enter Defendant's premises, as well as to review documents, for such purposes. Defendant shall not discourage employees from participating in these interviews. 10. Each party shall bear its own attorney fees and costs incurred in this action. 11. This Decree constitutes the complete understanding between the Parties hereto. No other promises or agreements shall be binding unless agreed to in writing and signed by the Parties. No waiver, modification or amendment or any provision of the Consent Decree
5

, .

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 6 of 9

shall be effective unless made in writing, approved by all Parties to this Decree and approved by the Court or ordered by the Court. 12. This Decree will remain in effect fot a period of three years from the date of entry ofthis Decree by the Court.

Dated: New York, New York
y~ IJ,2001

Dated: ,Hackensack, New Jersey

_ BY~ _-r____~=-______________
EQUAL E PLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Elizabeth Grossman Regional Attorney
Lisa Sirkin Supervisory Trial Attorney
Stella N. Yamada Trial Attorney New York District Office 33 Whitehall Street, 5th Floor New York, NY 10004-2112 Tel: (212) 336-3689 Fax: (212) 336-3623

Daniel P. Simpson, Esq. Attorney for Defendant Newman & Simpson, LLP The Armour Building 32 Mercer Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Tel: 201-487-0200 Fax: 201-487-8570

SO ORDERED:
(
..... ---/
Hon. Wexler, U.S.DJ.
~ tbicp/ N-~·

Date: 00{oll) o?
6

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 7 of 9 ExhihitA
LEGAL NOTICE The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") is a federal agency that serves the public by enforcing federal laws against discrimination in the workplace, including discrimination based on race and national origin.
On __ 2006, EEOC and Japanese Food Solutions, Inc., a restaurant business located in Carle Place, Long Island, agreed to settle a lawsuit EEOC filed against the restaurant on September 22, 2005. A consent decree was approved by Honorable Leonard D. Wexler ofthe United States
District Court for the Eastern District on - - -. The lawsuit claimed that the restaurant
discriminated against employees of Chinese origin, including not allowing them to speak Chinese, and retaliated against them for complaining about discrimination. The restaurant
.
denied the allegations of discrimination and wrongdoing contained in the lawsuit. As part of the settlement, EEOC and the restaurant agreed to provide training for employees and managers, and monetary compensation for employees who the EEOC determines were subject to discrimination. If you worked at the Minado® restaurant in Carle Place, Long Island, at any time between May 2003 and January 31,2007 and believe you experienced discrimination or retaliation because of your Chinese origin, please contact Stella N. Yamada at (212) 336-3689 or Kenneth An at (617) 565-2141 as soon as possible, no later than 30 days from the beginning date of publication, as you may be entitled to compensation from the settlement. You should know that it is unlawful for your employer to retaliate against you for your participation in this settlement.

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT Document 38 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 8 of 9 ExhibitB
u.s. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
New York District Office 33 Whitehall Street, 11th Floor
New York, New York 10004-2112 Telephone: (212) 336-3620 TDD: (212) 336-3622
General FAX: (212) 336-3625
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES OF JAPANESE FOOD SOLUTIONS INC.
This notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered into between Japanese Food Solutions Inc. ("JFSI") and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), in resolution of Case No. 05-4482 filed in the Eastern District Court of New York. In that lawsuit, EEOC alleged that JFSI violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et. seq. ("Title VII"), by engaging in national origin discrimination against employees of Chinese descent, including, but not limited to, maintaining an English-only Rule that was enforced only against employees of Chinese descent, and by engaging in retaliation. The parties entered into this Consent Decree voluntarily and without there being any findings of fact, any ruling or decision by the Court.
Federal law and the Consent Decree prohibit discrimination against any individual because of his or her national origin in any and all aspects of the employment relationship, such as hire, pay, promotion, assignments, hours, and any other terms, conditions or privileges of employment.
Federal law and the Consent Decree also prohibit retaliation against any individual by an employer because the individual complain!s of discrimination, cooperates with the government's investigation of a charge of discrimination, participates as a witness or potential witness in litigation, or otherwise exercises his or her rights under the law.
Pursuant to the Consent Decree, JFSI has agreed to rescind its English language policy. JFSI has further agreed to implement an anti-discrimination policy and a complaint procedure and to provide training to all staff.
Should you have any complaints of discrimination, you may contact the Equal Employment Op~ortunity Commission 33 Whitehall Street, 11t Floor New York, New York 10004-2112 (212) 336-3620, (800) 669-4000
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND SHALL NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE. This notice must remain posted until three years from the date of posting and may not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material.

. .

Case 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT DocEuxmheibnitt 3C8 Filed 02/21/2007 Page 9 of 9

. '

f
POLICY PROIDBITING QISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION

The Company is committed to a policy of equal employment opportunity for all its employees and applicants for employment under the requirements of applicable federal, state, and local laws. It is our policy to provide equal employment opportunity without unlawful discrimination in regards to race, creed, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, or any other classification protected by applicable federal, state, or local law. Equal Employment Opportunity applies to all personnel practices and decisions, including (but not limited to) recruitment, hiring, training, promotion, termination, leaves of absence, compensation, discipline, evaluation, benefits and transfers. Any discrimination in the workplace based upon membership in any protected classification is illegal and against Company policy. If you are aware of any violation of this policy, you are urged to report it under the complaint procedure set forth below. It is against the law and Company policy for any person to be retaliated against for opposing discrimination, for making a complaint of discrimination, or for assisting or supporting another employee with regard to a complaint of discrimination. In addition to this policy, the Company maintains a separate policy prohibiting workplace harassment, which may apply as well.
Complaint Procedure
If you believe that you have been subjected to discrimination in. violation ofthis policy, you have a right to file a complaint with the Company and are urged to do so promptly. This may be done orally or iri writing.
Any complaint alleging violation of this policy should be brought to the attention of your General Manager. If you do not feel comfortable in reporting the problem to your General Manager, you may bring it immediately to the attention of the Company by calling the Company's Confidential Employee Hotline at (201) 585-2022. This telephone number will accept a recorded message from any Company employee and your message will be retrieved by a Company officer and responded to within two business days. In order to facilitate a prompt investigation and resolution of the problem, you are urged to provide your full name and a telephone number where you may be reached during non-working hours.
Once a complaint is received, a record of the complaint will be made. The Company will, where warranted, investigate and attempt to resolve, in a timely and effective manner, all complaints of violations of this policy. Investigation may include interviews with the person making the complaint as well as with others having knowledge of the situation giving rise to the complaint. You may be asked to provide a written statement of the complaint to assist in our investigation.
If discrimination is found to have occurred, appropriate action remedying the situation will be taken. In addition, appropriate disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment of persons found to have violated this policy, will be taken. Once an investigation under this policy is completed, the Company will so inform the person making the Complaint such detail as may, under the circumstances, be appropriate.
In addition to the complaint procedure outlined in this policy, any person wishing to pursue other avenues may contact the appropriate government agencies.

 
 Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 1 of 8

CLOSED, MEDIATION
U.S. District Court Eastern District of New York (Central Islip) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-04482-LDW-AKT

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. Assigned to: Senior-Judge Leonard D. Wexler Referred to: Magistrate-Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson Cause: 28:451 Employment Discrimination

Date Filed: 09/22/2005 Date Terminated: 02/21/2007 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Mediator Eugene S. Ginsberg

represented by Eugene S. Ginsberg 300 Garden City Plaza 5th Floor Garden City, NY 11530-3324 (516) 746-9307 Fax: (516) 393-8282 Email: Esginsberg@aol.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.)

represented by Elizabeth Grossman EEOC 33 Whitehall Street 5th Floor New York, NY 212 336 3698 212 336 3698 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kam Sau Wong Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 33 Whitehall Street 5th Floor New York, NY 10004 212-336-3703 Fax: 212-336-3623 Email: kam.wong@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Stella Natsue Yamada E.E.O.C. 33 Whitehall Street

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 2 of 8

V.
Defendant
Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. doing business as Minado Restaurant

5th Floor New York, NY 10004 212-336-3689 Fax: 212-336-3623 Email: stella.yamada@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Daniel Paul Simpson Newman & Simpson LLP 32 Mercer Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 201-487-0200 Fax: 201-487-8570 Email: dsimpson@newmansimpson.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Elliott S. Joffe Newman & Simpson 32 Mercer Street Hackensaci, NJ 07601 201-487-0200 Fax: 201-487-8570 Email: ejoffe@newmansimpson.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/22/2005
09/22/2005 09/26/2005 11/22/2005 11/22/2005 11/23/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT (No Fee) against Japanese Food Solultions, Inc., filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Serret, Liliana) Modified on 9/23/2005 (Fagan, Linda). (Entered: 09/23/2005)

Summons Issued as to Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Serret, Liliana) (Entered: 09/23/2005)

Case Ineligible for Arbitration(Bollbach, Jean) (Entered: 09/26/2005)

2 ANSWER to Complaint Jury Trial and Corporate Disclosure by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc..(Simpson, Daniel) (Entered: 11/22/2005)

3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. (Simpson, Daniel) (Entered: 11/22/2005)

ORDER -- An initial conference is scheduled for January 4, 2006 at 11:00 a.m. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Signed by Judge James

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 3 of 8

11/23/2005 12/01/2005 12/06/2005 12/30/2005 12/30/2005 01/12/2006 01/12/2006 01/17/2006
01/17/2006

Orenstein on 11/23/05. (Adams-Ciardullo, Diana) (Entered: 11/23/2005)
4 ORDER -- An initial conference is scheduled for January 4, 2006 at 11:00 a.m. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Signed by Judge James Orenstein on 11/23/05. (Adams-Ciardullo, Diana) (Entered: 11/23/2005)
Email Notification Test - DO NOT REPLY (Mahon, Cinthia) (Entered: 12/01/2005)
5 NOTICE of Appearance by Kam Sau Wong on behalf of U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.) (Wong, Kam) (Entered: 12/06/2005)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Elliott S. Joffe on behalf of Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 12/30/2005)
ORDER -- On consent of counsel, the conference scheduled for January 4, 2006, at 11:00 a.m. is rescheduled for January 17, 2006, at 1:30 p.m.Approved by Judge James Orenstein on 12/30/05. (Sunshine, Jason) Modified on 12/30/2005 (Dasaro, Michele). (Entered: 12/30/2005)
7 Proposed Scheduling Order and Case Managment Order by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 01/12/2006)
11 Minute Entry for proceedings held before James Orenstein : Initial Conference Hearing held on 1/17/2006. SCHEDULING: (1) The next status conference will be held on June 6, 2006, at 11:30 a.m. (2) A pretrial conference will be held on October 17, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. THE FOLLOWING RULINGS WERE MADE: (1) I will enter a separate case management and scheduling order that reflects the deadlines set forth in the parties' joint discovery plan. (2) The parties will submit a jointly proposed protective order (or competing proposals that set forth areas of disagreement) no later than Friday, January 20, 2006. (3) The defendant will provide employee data (including lists of employees, their contact information, dates of birth, and social security numbers), subject to the terms of the protective order, no later than February 3, 2006. (4) I will defer decision on whether the limits on the numbers of interrogatories and depositions should be increased until the parties have more information about the likely number of claimants in the case and the parties' respective discovery needs. (Orenstein, James) Additional attachment(s) added on 1/17/2006 (Dasaro, Michele). (Entered: 01/17/2006)
10 SCHEDULING ORDER: Deadline for completion of initial disclosures required by Rule 26(a): January 17, 2006. First request for production of documents and first request for interrogatories due by: February 21, 2006. Deadline for joinder of additional parties and amendment of pleadings: April 18, 2006. Status Conference: June 6, 2006, at 11:30 a.m. All discovery, including production of all expert reports, if any, to be completed by: September 12, 2006. Dispositive motion process started

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 4 of 8

01/20/2006 01/20/2006 01/21/2006
01/23/2006 01/24/2006
02/15/2006
04/04/2006 04/18/2006 06/02/2006 06/02/2006 06/06/2006

by: September 26, 2006. Joint pretrial order due by: October 10, 2006. Pretrial Conference: October 17, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Judge James Orenstein on January 17, 2006. (Orenstein, James) (Entered: 01/17/2006)
12 MOTION for Protective Order by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Protective Order) (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 01/20/2006)
13 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 01/20/2006)
14 RESPONSE in Opposition re 12 MOTION for Protective Order filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Confidentiality and Protective Order) (Wong, Kam) (Entered: 01/21/2006)
15 RESPONSE in Opposition re 12 MOTION for Protective Order filed by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 01/23/2006)
ORDER re 15 Response -- The reply letter by the defendant fails to comply with Rules III.A.1 and III.A.3 of my individual practice rules and will be disregarded. Approved by Judge James Orenstein on 01/24/06. (Adams-Ciardullo, Diana) (Entered: 01/24/2006)
ORDER denying 12 Motion for Protective Order -- The defendant's application, docket entry ("DE") 12, is denied. The plaintiff's proposed confidentiality and protective order, DE 14-2, is approved. Approved by Judge James Orenstein on 02/15/06. (Adams-Ciardullo, Diana) (Entered: 02/15/2006)
Mag. Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson added. Mag. Judge James Orenstein no longer assigned to case. (Tzou, Ilene) (Entered: 04/04/2006)
16 AMENDED ANSWER to Plaintiff, EEOC Complaint Defendant, Japanese Food Solutions, Inc. by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Simpson, Daniel) (Entered: 04/18/2006)
17 Letter to Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 06/02/2006)
18 STATUS REPORT by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Wong, Kam) (Entered: 06/02/2006)
19 Minute Entry for proceedings held before A. Kathleen Tomlinson : Status Conference held on 6/06/2006. A telephonic status conference will be held on June 16, 2006 at 11:30 a.m. Plaintiffs' counsel is to initiate the call. Within ten days Defendant shall provide an affidavit outlining (a) the documents responsive to Plaintiff's requests that have been located; (b) how the search for responsive documents was conducted; and (c) the documents Defendant was asked for which he was unable to locate. If Plaintiff intends to pursue its claim for damages arising out of one claimants medical condition, Plaintiff shall provide claimant's medical records to me for an in camera review within 30 days. Within ten days,

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 5 of 8

06/16/2006
06/20/2006 06/22/2006 07/26/2006

Defendant shall produce payroll records setting forth pay in hours or rate and annually for the period in question as well as weekly payroll records for all 6 claimants. Defendant shall also produce financial records responsive to Plaintiff's request for such records, within ten days from any such request. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Magistrate judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson. (Jacobwitz, Beth) Modified on 6/23/2006 (Montero, Edher). (Entered: 06/19/2006)
20 Minute Entry for proceedings held before A. Kathleen Tomlinson : Telephone Status Conference held on 6/16/2006. SCHEDULING: The next Pretrial Conference will be held on October 17, 2006, at 9:30 a.m. THE FOLLOWING RULINGS WERE MADE: 1. Plaintiff's counsel advises that the one claimant who was considering a claim for damages based upon a medical condition has determined not to pursue such claim. Therefore, claimants are not required to produce HIPAA-compliant medical releases. Any claims for damages based upon alleged emotional distress or medical conditions are hereby waived. 2. Defendant's counsel is reviewing electronic data he has just received and intends to produce that information on a disk to the EEOC. 3. I have given Defendant's counsel until June 23, 2006 to advise the EEOC of his client's position whether he will pay the costs associated with an ad (and possible radio spot) to potential claimants to be published in the surrounding geographic area. 3. A part-time employee of Defendant is scheduled to be deposed on June 23, 2006. Defendant must produce to the EEOC not later than the close of business on June 21, 2006any documents responsive to the agency's outstanding document request as set forth in the Notice of Deposition served for this individual. SO ORDERED by A. Kathleen Tomlinson, USMJ. (Tomlinson, A.) Modified on 6/19/2006 (Montero, Edher). Modified on 6/19/2006 (Montero, Edher). Additional attachment (s) added on 6/19/2006 (Montero, Edher). Additional attachment(s) added on 6/19/2006 (Montero, Edher). Modified on 6/23/2006 (Montero, Edher). (Entered: 06/19/2006)
21 Letter MOTION for Reconsideration by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, Court Transcript of June 6, 2006, pp. 3-4# 2 Exhibit 2, Court Transcript of June 6, 2006 pp. 21-22# 3 Exhibit 3, Minute Entry of June 6, 2006)(Wong, Kam) (Entered: 06/20/2006)
22 RESPONSE in Opposition re 21 Letter MOTION for Reconsideration filed by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 06/22/2006)
23 Minute Entry for proceedings held before A. Kathleen Tomlinson : Telephone Conference held on 7/26/2006. This conference was scheduled to discuss with the parties the letter motion for reconsideration filed by Plaintiff on June 20, 2006 [DE 21]. For the reasons discussed in the record during today's telephone conference and set forth in a separate Order, Plaintiff's letter motion for reconsideration is DENIED as unnecessary and moot. So Ordered by Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson. (Tomlinson, A.) (Entered: 07/26/2006)

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 6 of 8

07/26/2006 07/28/2006 08/01/2006 08/11/2006 08/16/2006
08/16/2006
08/18/2006 08/21/2006 08/22/2006

24 ORDER finding as moot 21 Motion for Reconsideration filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 7/26/06. (Tomlinson, A.) (Entered: 07/26/2006)
26 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings/Conference held on June 6, 2006 before Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson. Court Reporter: Aria Transcriptions. (Mierzejewski, Elizabeth) (Entered: 08/02/2006)
25 Letter Requesting Inclusion in Mediation Program by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Stipulation and Proposed Order)(Wong, Kam) (Entered: 08/01/2006)
27 Letter MOTION for Protective Order Barring Discovery of Claimants' Immigration Status by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Wong, Kam) (Entered: 08/11/2006)
28 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Mediation.Selection of Mediator due by 8/30/2006. The parties are offered the option of (a) using a mediator from the Court's panel, (b) selecting a mediator on their own, or (c) seeking the assistance of a reputable neutral ADR organization in the selection of a mediator. Counsel shall consult with the ADR Administrator, Gerald P. Lepp, 718-260-2577, respecting their alternatives and selecting a mediator. Discovery is stayed for 60 days to allow for mediation of this matter. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 08/16/06. (Jacobwitz, Beth) (Entered: 08/16/2006)
29 MEDIATION INSTRUCTIONS sent to Counsel. Attached are Letters of Instruction. By 8/30/06, Counsel are to select a Mediator, schedule the first mediation session, and electronically file and confirm in writing to the ADR Administrator, Gerald P. Lepp, (fax 718-613-2399) the name of the Mediator and the date, time, and place of the first mediation session. Counsel are to confer with each other and to speak directly to the potential mediator in scheduling the first mediation session. For a list of EDNY Mediators and their qualifications, see the Court's website at "www.nyed.uscourts.gov/adr". The Confidentiality Stipulation attached to this notice is to be signed at the mediation session by all participants and the mediator and then faxed (718-613- 2399)to the ADR Administrator. In accordance with Administrative Order 2004-08 (as of August 2, 2004) electronic filing became mandatory in the Eastern District of New York for all cases,(pro se cases are excluded).(Lepp, Gerald) (Entered: 08/16/2006)
30 Letter MOTION to Take Deposition from Jon Fedenczak as an exception to Stay Order by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Wong, Kam) (Entered: 08/18/2006)
31 RESPONSE in Opposition re 30 Letter MOTION to Take Deposition from Jon Fedenczak as an exception to Stay Order filed by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 08/21/2006)
32 ORDER denying 30 Motion to Take Deposition from Jon Fedenczak. For

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 7 of 8

08/25/2006 08/25/2006 08/28/2006 08/30/2006 09/07/2006
10/12/2006 10/16/2006

the reasons set forth in the attached order, Plaintiff's motion to reopen discovery is DENIED and in the event the mediation is unsuccessful, Defendant shall provide dates for the deposition of Mr. Fedenczak forthwith. SEE ATTACHED ORDER. Ordered by JudgeA. Kathleen Tomlinson on 08/22/06. (Jacobwitz, Beth) (Entered: 08/22/2006)
33 MOTION to Compel appointment of mediator & EEOC to participate in mediation by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A to Tomlinson letter (emails)# 2 Exhibit B to Tomlinson letter (list))(Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 08/25/2006)
34 RESPONSE in Opposition re 33 MOTION to Compel appointment of mediator & EEOC to participate in mediation filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.). (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Emails between EEOC and Defendant)(Wong, Kam) (Entered: 08/25/2006)
35 Letter dtd. 8/28/06 from Elliott Joffe on behalf of Japanese Food Solultions, Inc. withdrawing the letter motion seeking to compel selection of a mediator. (Montero, Edher) (Entered: 08/30/2006)
Motions terminated: 33 MOTION to Compel appointment of mediator & EEOC to participate in mediation. (withdrawn as per doc #35). (Ordered by Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 8/30/06)(Montero, Edher) (Entered: 08/30/2006)
36 SELECTION OF MEDIATOR Eugene S. Ginsberg rep by Eugene S. Ginsberg selected as Mediator. The first mediation session will begin at 10:00AM on 10/11/06 in the offices of the Mediator at Eugene S. Ginsberg, Esq., 300 Garden City Plaza, Garden City, NY 11530. On or before 10/4/06, Counsel shall file with the Mediator their client's mediation statement summarizing the facts, legal issues, particulars of any prior settlement negotiations, and the name and title of the client representative with full settlement authority who will attend the mediation session in person. Attendance in person is required of the trial counsel, insurance adjustor, and client representative with full settlement authority. The Confidentiality Stipulation forwarded with the Mediation Letters of Instruction will be signed at the mediation session by all participants and the mediator and returned to the ADR Administrator, Gerald P. Lepp, fax (718) 613-2399. Contact information for the Mediator is: telephone (516) 746-9307; fax (516) 393-8282; email address "Esginsberg@aol.com".Report of Mediation due by 10/25/2006. (Lepp, Gerald) (Entered: 09/07/2006)
37 MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery by Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. (Joffe, Elliott) (Entered: 10/12/2006)
ORDER granting 37 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery. Discovery is stayed in the matter until Novemebr 16, 2006 to allow the parties an opportunity to continue in mediation. Ordered by JudgeA. Kathleen Tomlinson on 10/16/06. (Jacobwitz, Beth) (Entered: 10/16/2006)

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007

Eastern District of New York - Live Database Version 3.0.5 Release - Docket Report

Page 8 of 8

02/21/2007

38 CONSENT JUDGMENT in favor of U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (E.E.O.C.) against Japanese Food Solultions, Inc.. Ordered by Judge Leonard D. Wexler on 2/21/07. m (Mierzejewski, Elizabeth) (Entered: 02/23/2007)

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt

06/12/2007 15:04:10

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:05-cv-04482-LDWAKT

Billable Pages: 5

Cost:

0.40

https://ecf.nyed.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?921983965969336-L_353_0-1

6/12/2007