Qinyu Fan, Esq. Hang & Associates, PLLC 136-20 38th Avenue, … · 2019-08-08 · 1 Qinyu Fan, Esq....

1

Qinyu Fan, Esq.

Hang & Associates, PLLC

136-20 38th Avenue, Suite 10G

Flushing, NY 11354

Tel: (718) 353-8588

Fax: (718) 353-6288

Email: [email protected]

Attorney for Plaintiff and proposed FLSA Collective

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

----------------------------------------------------------X

Luis Lema, individually

and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

Case No.:

-against-

Petros & Son’s, Inc. of Ewing N.J. d/b/a Ewing Diner,

Petros Grumitsaris a/k/a Peter, and Peter Kritsikokas,

Defendants.

-----------------------------------------------------------X

Plaintiff, Luis Lema, by and through his undersigned attorneys, brings this complaint

against the Defendants Petros & Sons, Inc. of Ewing N.J. d/b/a Ewing Diner, Petros Grumitsaris

a/k/a Peter, and Peter Kritsikokas (collectively “Defendants”), allege and show the Court the

following:

INTRODUCTION

1. This action is brought by Plaintiff, on behalf of himself as well as all other

employees similarly situated, against Defendants for alleged violations of the Federal Labor

Standards Act, (“FLSA”) 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., and of the New Jersey State Wage and Hour

COLLECTIVE ACTION

COMPLAINT

Case 3:19-cv-16457-MAS-TJB Document 1 Filed 08/07/19 of 15 PageID: 1

2

Law, NJSA§34:11-56 et seq. (hereinafter “NJWHL”), arising from Defendants’ various willful

and unlawful employment policies, patterns and/or practices.

2. Upon information and belief, Defendants have willfully and intentionally

committed widespread violations of the FLSA and NJWHL by engaging in a pattern and practice

of failing to adequately pay its employees, including Plaintiff, overtime compensation for all hours

worked over forty (40) each workweek.

3. Plaintiff alleges pursuant to the FLSA, that he is entitled to recover from the

Defendants: (1) unpaid overtime wages, (2) liquidated damages, (3) prejudgment and post-

judgment interest; and (4) attorneys’ fees and costs.

4. Plaintiff further alleges pursuant to New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law

(“NJWHL”) that he is entitled to recover from the Defendants: (1) unpaid overtime compensation,

(2) liquidated damages equal to the unpaid overtime, (3) prejudgment interest, (4) post-judgment

interest, and (5) attorney’s fees and costs.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

5. This Court has original federal question jurisdiction over this controversy under

29 U.S.C. §216(b), 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and has supplemental jurisdiction over the New Jersey State

Law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).

6. Venue is proper in the District of New Jersey pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and

(c), because Defendants conduct business in this District, and the acts and omissions giving rise to

the claims herein alleged took place in the jurisdiction of this District.

PLAINTIFF


3

7. From on or around October 1, 2017 to on or around April 21, 2019, Plaintiff Luis

Lema was employed as a cook in Defendants’ restaurant located at 1099 Parkway Ave., Ewing,

NJ 08628.

8. Plaintiff’s daily duties include chef helper, dishwasher, stock boy, and more.

DEFENDANTS

Corporate Defendant

9. Defendant Petros & Son’s, Inc. of Ewing N.J. trading as Ewing Diner (hereinafter

“Ewing Diner”) is a corporation incorporated under the laws of New Jersey and has its registered

office at 1148 River Road, W. Trenton, NJ 08628.

10. Upon information and belief, Corporate Defendant has about 10 employees.

11. Upon information and belief, Corporate Defendant at all relevant times is a business

engaged in interstate commerce that has gross sales in excess of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars

($500,000) per year.

12. Upon information and belief, Corporate Defendant purchased, and handled goods

moved in interstate commerce. For instance, Corporate Defendant has employees who handled

and worked on goods moved in interstate commerce such as flour and food supplies.

13. At all relevant times, Corporate Defendant was, and continues to be, an “enterprise

engaged in commerce” within the meaning of FLSA.

Owner/ Operator Defendants

14. Upon information and belief, Defendant Petros Gromitsaris a/k/a Peter is the owner,

chief executive officer, and/or managing agent of Defendant Corporation and participated in the

day-to-day operations of Defendant Corporation.

15. Upon information and belief, Defendant Petros Gromitsaris determined the wages

and compensation of the employees of Defendants, including Luis Lema, and established work


4

schedules and workload of the employees, maintained employee records, and had the authority to

hire and fire employees.

16. Defendant Petros Gromitsaris acted intentionally and maliciously, and is an

employer pursuant to FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203d, and regulations promulgated thereunder, 29 C.F.R.

§791.2; NJWHL §34:11-4.1 and the regulations thereunder; and is jointly and severally liable with

Defendant Corporation.

Peter Kritsikokas

17. Upon information and belief, Defendant Peter Kritsikokas is the owner, chief executive

officer, and/or managing agent of Defendant Corporation and participated in the day-to-

day operations of Defendant Corporation.

18. Upon information and belief, Defendant Peter Kritsikokas determined the wages and

compensation of the employees of Defendants, including Luis Lema, and established the

type of work to be completed by employees.

19. Defendant Peter Kritsikokas acted intentionally and maliciously, and is an employer

pursuant to FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203d, and regulations promulgated thereunder, 29 C.F.R.

§791.2; NJWHL §34:11-4.1 and the regulations thereunder; and is jointly and severally

liable with Defendant Corporation.

20. Plaintiff has fulfilled all conditions precedent to the institution of this action and/or

conditions have been waived.

FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS

21. Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of all other and former non-exempt

employees who have been or were employed by the Defendants at their restaurant locations

for up to the last three (3) years, through entry of judgment in this case (the “Collective


5

Action Period”) (the “Collective Action Members”). Upon information and belief, the

Collection Action Members are so numerous the joinder of all members is impracticable.

The identity and precise number of such persons are unknown, and the facts upon which

the calculations of that number may be ascertained are presently within the sole control of

the Defendants. Upon information and belief, there are more than 8 Collective Action

members, who have worked for or have continued to work for the Defendants during the

Collective Action Period, most of whom would not likely file individual suits because they

fear retaliation, lack adequate financial resources, access to attorneys, or knowledge of their

claims. Therefore, Plaintiff submits that this case should be certified as a collection action

under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §216(b).

22. Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Collective Action Members,

and have retained counsel that is experienced and competent in the field of employment

law and class action litigation. Plaintiff has no interests that are contrary to or in conflict

with those members of this collective action.

23. This action should be certified as a collective action because the prosecution of separate

actions by individual members of the collective action would risk creating either

inconsistent or varying adjudication with respect to individual members of this class that

would as a practical matter be dispositive of the interest of the other members not party to

the adjudication, or subsequently impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.

24. A collective action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient

adjudication of this controversy, since joinder of all members is impracticable.

Furthermore, inasmuch as the damages suffered by individual Collective Action Members

may be relatively small, the expense and burden of individual litigation makes it virtually


6

impossible for the members of the collective action to individually seek redress for the

wrongs done to them. There will be no difficulty in the management of this action as a

collective action.

25. Questions of law and fact common to members of the collective action predominate over

questions that may affect only individual members because Defendants have acted on

grounds generally applicable to all members. Among the questions of fact common to

Plaintiff and other Collective Action Members are:

a. Whether the Defendants employed Collective Action members within the meaning of

the FLSA;

b. Whether the Defendants’ violations of the FLSA are willful as that terms are used within

the context of the FLSA; and,

c. Whether the Defendants are liable for all damages claimed hereunder, including but not

limited to compensatory, punitive, and statutory damages, interest, costs and disbursements

and attorneys’ fees.

26. Plaintiff knows of no difficulty that will be encountered in the management of this litigation

that would preclude its maintenance as a collective action.

27. Plaintiff and others similarly situated have been substantially damaged by Defendants’

unlawful conduct.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

28. Defendants committed the following alleged acts knowingly, intentionally and willfully.

29. Defendants knew that the nonpayment of minimum wage and overtime pay would

financially injure Plaintiff and similarly situated employees and violate state and federal

laws.


7

30. From on or around October 1, 2017 to on or around April 21, 2019, Plaintiff Luis Lema

was employed as a dish washer, stock boy, and chef helper in Defendants’ restaurant

located at 1099 Parkway Ave., Ewing, NJ 08628.

31. Plaintiff Lema’s job duties includes helping the chef, stocking, dish washing, and

performing other side work including organizing the inventories.

32. Upon information and belief, Defendant Petros Gromitsaris known as "Peter” to Plaintiff,

is the owner/member of Ewing Diner, and maintains active operational control over Ewing

Diner, including, without limitation to hiring and firing employees, supervising and

controlling the employees, setting their work schedule, determining their rates of

compensation and methods of payment, handling payrolls, and maintaining employee

records.

33. Defendant Petros Gromitsaris controlled and determined the work schedule of Plaintiff

Luis Lema.

34. Defendant Petros Gromitsaris determined the rates of compensation of Plaintiff Luis Lema

and methods of payment.

35. Defendant Petros Gromitsaris handled wage payments to Plaintiff Luis Lema and

maintained his employment records.

36. Plaintiff worked five days per week. From approximately October 1, 2017 to on or around

April 21, 2019. On Monday and Tuesday Plaintiff worked from 9:00 am to 6:00pm, and

Friday to Sunday he worked from 9:00 am to 7:00pm. Plaintiff was not able to take meal

breaks during each shift, and when he could catch a break between works, each break lasts

about 5 to 10 minutes. Plaintiff Luis Lema therefore worked seventy (70) hours per week.


8

37. For Plaintiff Lema’s employment with Defendants from October 1, 2017 to on or around

January 1, 2019, Plaintiff was paid at $10.00 per hour regardless the number of hours he

actually worked each week. From January 1, 2019 to on or around March 19, 2019, Plaintiff

was paid at $11.00 per hour regardless the number of hours he actually worked each week.

From March 19, 2019 to April 21, 2019, Plaintiff was paid $12.00 per hour.

38. Throughout his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff Lema was not compensated for all

hours worked above forty (40) in each workweek according to state and federal laws as he

did not receive the time and half of his regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40

hours in any given week.

39. Throughout his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff Lema was not overtime-exempt

under federal and state laws.

40. Upon information and belief, Defendants failed to keep full and accurate records of

Plaintiff Lema’s hours and wages. The hours reflected on Plaintiff’s pay stubs do not

represent the number of hours he actually worked.

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

COUNT I.

[Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act—Overtime Wage

Brought on behalf of the Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective]

41. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as though fully

set forth herein.

42. At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Defendants have been, and continue to

be, “employers” engaged in interstate “commerce” and/or in the production of “goods” for


9

“commerce,” within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §207(a). Further, Plaintiff is

covered within the meaning of FLSA, U.S.C. §207(a).

43. At all relevant times, Defendants employed “employees” including Plaintiff, within the

meaning of FLSA.

44. Upon information and belief, at all relevant times, Defendants have had gross revenues in

excess of $500,000.

45. The FLSA provides that no employer engaged in commerce shall employ a covered

employee for a work week longer than forty (40) hours unless such employee receives

compensation for employment in excess of forty (40) hours at a rate not less than one and

one-half times the regular rate at which he or she is employed, or one and one-half times

the minimum wage, whichever is greater. 29 USC §207(a).

46. The FLSA provides that any employer who violates the provisions of 29 U.S.C. §207 shall

be liable to the employees affected in the amount of their unpaid overtime compensation,

and in an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. 29 U.S.C. §216(b).

47. Here, Plaintiff was paid a fixed rate of $10.00 per hour regardless the number of hours he

actually worked each week from October 1, 2017 to on or around January 1, 2019. From

January 1, 2019 to on or around March 19, 2019, Plaintiff was paid at $11.00 per hour

From March 19, 2019 to April 21, 2019, Plaintiff was paid $12.00 per hour. Thus, during

the employment, Plaintiff was paid at a fixed rate regardless the number of hours he

actually worked. In this way, for the hours Plaintiff worked over forty(40) a week, Plaintiff

was compensated at his or her regular hourly rate, while the FLSA requires a compensation

at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he or she is employed.


10

48. Therefore, at all relevant times, Defendants had, and continue to have, a policy of practice

of refusing to pay overtime compensation at the statutory rate of time and a half to Plaintiff

and Collective Action Members for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per

workweek, which violated and continues to violate the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§201, et

seq., including 29 U.S.C. §§207(a)(1) and 215(a).

49. The FLSA and supporting regulations required employers to notify employees of

employment law requirements. 29 C.F.R. §516.4.

50. Defendants willfully failed to notify Plaintiff and FLSA Collective of the requirements of

the employment laws in order to facilitate their exploitation of Plaintiff and FLSA

Collectives’ labor.

51. Defendants knowingly and willfully disregarded the provisions of the FLSA as evidenced

by their failure to compensate Plaintiff and Collective Class Members the statutory

overtime rate of time and one half for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per week

when they knew or should have known such was due and that failing to do so would

financially injure Plaintiff and Collective Action members.

52. For the above reasons, Plaintiff is entitled to an award for his or her unpaid overtime

compensation required by the FLSA, and the liquidate damage equal to this amount.

COUNT II.

[Violation of New Jersey Wage and Hour Law—Overtime Pay

Brought on behalf of Plaintiff]

53. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as though fully

set forth herein.

54. NJWHL 12:56-6.1 provides that, for each hour of working time in excess of 40 hours in

any week, except for those exemptions set forth in N.J.S.A. 34:11-56a4 or as provided in


11

N.J.A.C. 12:56-7.1, every employer shall pay to each of his or her employees, wages at a

rate of not less than 1 and ½ times such employee’s regular hourly wage.

55. The NJWHL and supporting regulations required employers to notify employees of

employment law requirements. NJWHL 8:43E-8.6 et seq.

56. Here, as discussed above, Plaintiff, during the employment, was paid at a fixed rate

regardless the number of hours he actually worked. In this way, for the hours Plaintiff

worked over forty(40) a week, Plaintiff was only compensated at his or her regular hourly

rate, while the NJWHL requires a compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half

times the regular rate at which he or she is employed.

57. At all relevant times, Defendants had a policy and practice of refusing to pay the overtime

compensation to Plaintiff at time and one half times the regular rate the Plaintiff in violation

of New Jersey Wage and Hour Law.

58. Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff adequate compensation was not in good faith.

59. By failing to pay Plaintiff and the Collective Class Members, the Plaintiff and the

Collective Class Members are entitled to recover from Defendants their full unpaid

overtime pay, damages for unreasonably delayed payment of wages, liquidated damages,

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and disbursement of the action pursuant to NJWHL

§§34:11-56a et seq.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of himself, and the FLSA Collective Plaintiffs,

respectfully requests that this Court enter a Judgment providing the following relief:


12

a) Authorizing Plaintiff at the earliest possible time to give notice of this collective action, or

that the Court issue such notice, to all persons who are presently, or have up through the extent

allowable under the statute of limitations and including the date of issuance of court-supervised

notice, been employed by Defendants as non-exempt employees. Such notice shall inform them

that the civil notice has been filed, of the nature of the action, of their right to join this lawsuit if

they believe they were denied premium overtime wages;

b) Certification of this case as a collective action pursuant to FLSA;

c) Issuance of notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) to all similarly situated members of the

FLSA opt-in class, apprising them of the pendency of this action, and permitting them to assert

timely FLSA claims and state claims in this action by filing individual Consent to Sue forms

pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and appointing Plaintiff and his counsel to represent the Collective

Action Members;

d) A declaratory judgment that the practices complained of herein are unlawful under

FLSA and NJWHL;

e) An injunction against Corporate Defendants, its officers, agents, successors, employees,

representatives and any and all persons acting in concert with them as provided by law, from

engaging in each of unlawful practices and policies set forth herein;

f) Award Plaintiff unpaid wages, and unpaid overtime due under the FLSA and the NJWHL

plus compensatory and liquidated damages;

g) Award Plaintiff reimbursement of tools of trade under FLSA;

h) An award of costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and

expert fees pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §216(b) and NJWHL;

i) The cost and disbursements of this action;


13

j) An award of prejudgment and post-judgment fees; and

k) Such other and further legal and equitable relief as this Court deems necessary, just, and

proper.

JURY DEMAND

Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff demands a trial by

jury of all issues so triable.

Dated: Flushing, New York

August 2, 2019

Respectfully Submitted,

HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC

By: _____s/_Qinyu Fan ____________

Qinyu Fan, Esq.

136-20 38th Ave. Suite 10G

Flushing, NY 11354

Tel: (718) 353-8588

Fax: (718) 353-6288

E-mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for Plaintiff(s)


mailto:[email protected]

14

Exhibit 1


15


JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except asprovided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for thepurpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEFPlaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4

of Business In This State

’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6 Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 376 Qui Tam (31 USC ’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability ’ 367 Health Care/ ’ 400 State Reapportionment’ 150 Recovery of Overpayment ’ 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS ’ 410 Antitrust

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury ’ 820 Copyrights ’ 430 Banks and Banking’ 151 Medicare Act ’ 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability ’ 830 Patent ’ 450 Commerce’ 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability ’ 368 Asbestos Personal ’ 835 Patent - Abbreviated ’ 460 Deportation

Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and (Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability ’ 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations

’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY ’ 480 Consumer Credit of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV

’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 891 Agricultural Acts

’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 893 Environmental Matters Medical Malpractice Leave Act ’ 895 Freedom of Information

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: ’ 791 Employee Retirement ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff ’ 896 Arbitration’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) ’ 899 Administrative Procedure’ 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ’ 442 Employment ’ 510 Motions to Vacate ’ 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of’ 240 Torts to Land ’ 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision’ 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations ’ 530 General ’ 950 Constitutionality of’ 290 All Other Real Property ’ 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes

Employment Other: ’ 462 Naturalization Application’ 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 540 Mandamus & Other ’ 465 Other Immigration

Other ’ 550 Civil Rights Actions’ 448 Education ’ 555 Prison Condition

’ 560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)

’ 1 OriginalProceeding

’ 2 Removed fromState Court

’ 3 Remanded fromAppellate Court

’ 4 Reinstated orReopened

’ 5 Transferred fromAnother District(specify)

’ 6 MultidistrictLitigation -Transfer

’ 8 Multidistrict Litigation - Direct File

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity): Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT:

’ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTIONUNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

JURY DEMAND: ’ Yes ’No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Case 3:19-cv-16457-MAS-TJB Document 1-1 Filed 08/07/19 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 16

http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/civil-cover-sheet

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers asrequired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, isrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk ofCourt for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving both name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark thissection for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers.Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to changes in statue.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.

Case 3:19-cv-16457-MAS-TJB Document 1-1 Filed 08/07/19 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 17

http://www.uscourts.gov/forms/civil-forms/civil-cover-sheet

Qinyu Fan, Esq. Hang & Associates, PLLC 136-20 38th Avenue, … · 2019-08-08 · 1 Qinyu Fan, Esq....

Documents

Transcript of Qinyu Fan, Esq. Hang & Associates, PLLC 136-20 38th Avenue, … · 2019-08-08 · 1 Qinyu Fan, Esq....