IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

DORIS ASIRIFI

1810 Manor Drive, Apt D

Union, NJ 07083

and

CHINWE NWAFOR

17 Holland Street

Newark NJ 07103

Plaintiffs,

v.

OMNI ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC d/b/a 

OMNI HEALTH SYSTEMS OF NEW

JERSEY

26 Journal Square #16

Jersey City, NJ 07306

and 

WEST HUDSON SUB-ACUTE CARE 

CENTER, LLC 

206 Bergen Avenue

Kearney NJ 07302

Defendants

CIVIL ACTION NO:

COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND

COLLECTIVE ACTION CIVIL COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Doris Asirifi, and Chinwe Nwafor (hereinafter collectively “Plaintiffs”), by and 

through undersigned counsel, hereby complain as follows against Defendant Omni Asset 

Management, LLC and Defendant West-Hudson Sub-Acute Care Center, LLC (hereinafter 

“Defendants”). 

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 1 of 10 PageID: 1
INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiffs have initiated the instant action to redress violations by Defendants of 

the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (“NJWHL”) and 

the New Jersey Wage Payment Law (“NJWPL”). Defendants intentionally failed to pay 

Plaintiffs for all hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiff 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for 

hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek. As a result of Defendants’ unlawful actions, 

Plaintiffs have suffered harm. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. This Court, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1331, has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’

federal claims because this civil action arises under a law of the United States and seeks redress 

for violations of a federal law. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims 

because they are supplemental to Plaintiffs’ underlying federal claims and arise out of the same 

transaction or occurrence(s), having the same common nucleus of operative facts pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1367(a).

3. This Court may properly maintain personal jurisdiction over Defendants because 

Defendants’ contacts with this state and this judicial district are sufficient for the exercise of 

jurisdiction over Defendants to comply with traditional notions of fair play and substantial 

justice.

4. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and (b)(2), venue is properly laid in this 

judicial district because all of the acts and/or omissions giving rise to the claims set forth herein 

occurred in this judicial district and Defendants are deemed to reside where they are subject to 

personal jurisdiction, rendering Defendants residents of the this judicial district.

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 2 of 10 PageID: 2
PARTIES

5. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

6. Plaintiff Doris Asirifi (hereinafter “Plaintiff Asirifi”) is an adult individual with 

an address as set forth above.

7. Plaintiff Chinwe Nwafor (hereinafter “Plaintiff Nwafor”) is an adult individual 

with an address as set forth above.

8. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Omni Asset Management, LLC d/b/a 

Omni Health Systems of New Jersey (hereinafter “Defendant Omni”), is a health systems 

operator, that is, upon information and belief, a New Jersey corporation with an address as set 

forth in the caption that owns and operates nursing home facilities throughout New Jersey

including the West Hudson Post-Acute Care Center.

9. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant West Hudson Sub-Acute Care Center, 

LLC (hereinafter “Defendant West Hudson”) employed individuals to work at Defendant West 

Hudson’s West Hudson Post-Acute Care Center, a long term nursing facility located in Kearny, 

New Jersey.

10. At all times relevant herein, Defendants acted by and through their agents, 

servants, and employees, each of whom acted at all times relevant herein in the course and scope 

of their employment with and for Defendants. 

FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS

11. Plaintiffs bring this action for violations of the FLSA as a collective action 

pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of all persons presently and 

formerly employed as hourly employees by Defendants who worked or work in Defendants’

nursing facility located in Kearney, New Jersey, or in another facility owned or operated by 

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 3 of 10 PageID: 3
Defendants, and who are/were subject to Defendants’ the same unlawful pay practices and 

policies as were Plaintiffs and who worked/work for Defendants at any point since December 

2010 (these members of this putative class will be referred to as “Collective Action Plaintiffs”).

12. Collective Action Plaintiffs are similarly situated, have substantially similar nonmanagerial job duties, have substantially similar pay provisions, and are all subject to 

Defendants’ unlawful policies and practices as discussed infra.

13. There are numerous similarly situated current and former employees of 

Defendants’ who were compensated improperly for overtime work in violation of the FLSA and 

who would benefit from the issuance of a Court Supervised Notice of the instant lawsuit and the 

opportunity to join in the present lawsuit. 

14. Similarly situated employees are known to Defendants, are readily identifiable 

by Defendants, and can be located through Defendants’ records. 

15. Therefore, Plaintiffs should be permitted to bring this action as a collective 

action for and on behalf of themselves and those employees similarly situated (i.e., the Collective 

Action Plaintiffs), pursuant to the “opt-in” provisions of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

16. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

17. Plaintiff Asirifi was hired by Clara Maass Continuing Care Systems in or around 

October 2006.

18. Plaintiff Nwafor was hired by Clara Maass Continuing Care Systems in or 

around December 2006.

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 4 of 10 PageID: 4
19. Clara Maass Continuing Care Systems owned and operated the Clara Maass 

Continuing Care Center, a nursing and rehabilitation facility, located at 206 Bergen Avenue, 

Kearney New Jersey.

20. Upon information and belief, Clara Maass Continuing Care Systems’ nursing 

facility in Kearney New Jersey was sold to Defendants on or about December 10, 2010. 

21. Thereupon, the nursing facility was renamed the West Hudson Post-Acute Care 

Center.

22. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Asirifi served as a registered nurse at the 

West Hudson Post-Acute Care Center.

23. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Nwafor served as a registered nurse at the 

West Hudson Post-Acute Care Center.

24. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiffs were paid on an hourly basis.

25. At all times relevant herein Plaintiffs regularly worked for Defendants in excess 

of 40 hours per workweek. 

26. Plaintiff Asirifi was to be compensated at a rate of $29.45/hr and 1.5 times this 

rate for each hour that Plaintiff worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.

27. Plaintiff Nwafor was to be compensated at a rate of $27.25/hr and 1.5 times this

rate for each hour that Plaintiff worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.

28. Plaintiffs were scheduled to work five (5) eight (8) hour shifts per week, though 

they regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek.

29. Defendants paid Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs for only 7.5 hours per 

day for each scheduled shift. Thirty (30) minutes of pay was automatically deducted from each 

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 5 of 10 PageID: 5
employee’s pay per shift for a break even though Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs, 

rarely, if ever took a 30 minute break during their shift.

30. On dates where Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs did not take a break, 

Defendants failed to pay wages that were due them for work they performed, and failed to pay 

Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs their entire hourly rate, resulting in Plaintiffs and 

Collective Action Plaintiffs suffering damages in the form of financial harm; these failures were 

intentional on Defendants’ part. 

31. Plaintiffs regularly worked for Defendants in excess of 42 hours per workweek. 

32. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs at the rate of 1.5 times Plaintiffs’ regular rate 

of pay for each hour that Plaintiffs worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. 

33. Defendants paid Plaintiffs only part of their wages for the services they performed 

and the hours they worked from December 10, 2010 onward. 

COUNT I

Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

(Failure to Pay Minimum Wage)

34. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in their entirety.

35. At all times relevant herein, Defendants were and continue to be an “employer” 

within the meaning of the FLSA.

36. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs were

employed by Defendants as “employees” within the meaning of the FLSA.

37. The FLSA requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to minimally 

compensate employees, such as Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs, at the federal 

minimum wage rate for each hour worked.

38. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs the federal 

minimum wage for hours they worked.

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 6 of 10 PageID: 6
39. As a result of Defendants’ failure to compensate Plaintiffs and Collective Action 

Plaintiffs pursuant to federal minimum wage, Defendants have violated and continue to violate 

the FLSA.

COUNT II

Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)

(Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation)

40. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 

41. At all times relevant herein, Defendants were and continue to be employers within 

the meaning of the FLSA.

42. Defendants had control over Plaintiffs’ and Collective Action Plaintiffs’ pay from 

on or about December 10, 2010 onwards.

43. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs were

employed by Defendants as non-exempt employees within the meaning of the FLSA.

44. Under the FLSA, an employer must pay a non-exempt employee at least one and 

one half times the employee’s regular hourly rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of forty 

per workweek.

45. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA include, but are not limited to: 

a. not paying Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs at least 1.5 times 

their regular hourly rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty per workweek; and

b. not using proper record keeping to ensure that Plaintiffs and Collective 

Action Plaintiffs were paid for each and every hour they worked.

46. Defendants’ conduct caused Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs to suffer 

damages.

COUNT III

Violations of the New Jersey Wage & Hour Law

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 7 of 10 PageID: 7
(Failure to Pay Minimum Wage)

47. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 

48. At all times relevant herein, Defendants were and continue to be an “employer” 

within the meaning of New Jersey Wage & Hour Law. 

49. New Jersey Wage & Hour Law requires covered employers, such as Defendants, 

to minimally compensate their “non-exempt” employees, such as Plaintiffs, 1.5 times the 

employee’s regular rate of pay for each hour that the employee works over 40 in a workweek. 

50. New Jersey Wage & Hour Law requires covered employers, such as Defendants, 

to minimally compensate employees, such as Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs, at the 

state minimum wage rate for each hour worked.

51. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs the state 

minimum wage for hours they worked.

52. As a result of Defendants’ failure to compensate Plaintiffs and Collective Action 

Plaintiffs pursuant to New Jersey Wage & Hour Law, Defendants have violated and continue to 

violate New Jersey Wage & Hour Law. 

COUNT IV

Violations of the New Jersey Wage & Hour Law

(Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation)

53. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 

54. At all times relevant herein, Defendants were and continue to be an “employer” 

within the meaning of New Jersey Wage & Hour Law. 

55. New Jersey Wage & Hour Law requires covered employers, such as Defendants, 

to minimally compensate their “non-exempt” employees, such as Plaintiffs, 1.5 times the 

employee’s regular rate of pay for each hour that the employee works over 40 in a workweek. 

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 8 of 10 PageID: 8
56. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs were “nonexempt” employees within the meaning of New Jersey Wage & Hour Laws.

57. Defendants knew that Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs were “nonexempt” employee within the meaning of New Jersey Wage & Hour Law.

58. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs 1.5 times their 

regular rate of pay for each hour worked over 40 each workweek.

59. As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs 

the overtime compensation due them, Defendants have violated New Jersey Wage & Hour Law, 

causing Plaintiffs to suffer damages. 

COUNT V

Violations of the New Jersey Wage Payment Law

(Failure to Pay Wages)

60. The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 

61. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs all wages due 

them owed under the law.

62. Defendants’ conduct violated the New Jersey Wage Payment Law.

63. As a result of Defendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintiffs and Collective Action 

Plaintiffs suffered damages as set forth herein.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs prays that this Court enter an Order providing that:

Defendants be prohibited from continuing to maintain its illegal policy, practice or 

custom in violation of federal and state law;

Defendants are to compensate, reimburse, and make Plaintiffs and Collective Action 

Plaintiffs whole for any and all pay and benefits they would have received had it not been for 

Defendants’ illegal actions;

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 9 of 10 PageID: 9
Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs are to be awarded liquidated damages for 

Defendants’ illegal actions, as provided under applicable law;

Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs are to be awarded the costs and expenses of this 

action and reasonable legal fees as provided under applicable law;

Plaintiffs and Collective Action Plaintiffs are to be awarded any and all other equitable 

and legal relief as the Court deems appropriate.

Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Richard Swartz

Richard S. Swartz, Esq.

Manali Arora, Esq.

SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC

1878 Marlton Pike East, Ste. 10

Cherry Hill, NJ 08003

Phone: (856) 685-7420

Fax: (856) 685-7417

Dated: July 5, 2011

Case 2:11-cv-04039-SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 07/14/11 Page 10 of 10 PageID: 10