Zhen Zhu v. Matsu Corp. et al
| Gui Zhen Zu |
| Matsu Corp., Matsu Grill Co. LLC, Kimming Marty Cheng and Ziquiao Cao |
| 3:2018cv00203 |
| February 2, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Fairfield |
| Charles S. Haight |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
80
RULING (see attached). The Court has reviewed the pending motions in this action, and its Ruling is summarized as follows. Attorney LeVasseur's Second Motion to Withdraw 68 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The Court GRANTS Atto rney LeVasseur's motion to withdraw as counsel for Defendants. Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to terminate Attorney LeVasseur's appearance in this matter. However, the Court DENIES Attorney LeVasseur's request to stay the matter for an additional thirty (30) days. Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike and Enter Default 65 is GRANTED AS MODIFIED. First, Plaintiffs' request to strike Defendants' Answer 13 as a sanction is GRANTED. Second, Plaintiffs' r equest to enter Defendants' default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Clerk is directed to enter the default of all Defendants. Third, Plaintiffs' request to deem Plaintiff Zhu's Complaint 1 modified to include the claims of Plaintiff Yin and permit Plaintiffs to move for default judgment is GRANTED AS MODIFIED. Specifically, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs leave to amend Plaintiff Zhu's Complaint to include the claims of Plaintif f Yin. The Court further DIRECTS Plaintiffs to file and serve any amended complaint on or before May 1, 2022 in a manner consistent with the requirements set forth in the attached Ruling. If Defendants fail to respond to Plaintiffs' amen ded complaint within twenty-one (21) days after service, Plaintiff Zhu and Plaintiff Yin may jointly move for default judgment by June 1, 2022. If no motion for default judgment is filed by this date, this action will be dismissed by t he Clerk pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). Plaintiffs' Motion for Prejudgment Remedy and Disclosure of Assets 71 is DENIED without prejudice to refiling, if Plaintiffs choose to do so, on or before May 1, 2022. Plaintiff Zhu's Motion for Class Certification 39 is DENIED AS MOOT. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on March 31, 2022. (Noble, N.)
|
|
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM & ORDER (see attached) extending the time within which Defendants' successor counsel must appear to and including March 13, 2020. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on March 2, 2020. (Marienko, A.)
|
|
Filing
63
RULING (see attached). For the reasons stated in the attached Ruling, 60 Attorney LeVasseur's Motion to Withdraw Appearance as Defendants' Counsel is DENIED without prejudice. All proceedings in this action are STAYED pending the filing o f a notice of appearance by Defendants' successor counsel. Defendants must cause successor counsel to file a notice of appearance in this action on or before February 28, 2020. The deadline for Defendants to comply with the 59 January 2 , 2020 Order and produce a list containing information regarding the non-exempt employees employed by Defendants during the relevant time period is extended until March 13, 2020. The statute of limitations in this collective action is TOLLED from the date of this Ruling until March 13, 2020. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on January 29, 2020. (Marienko, A.)
|
|
Filing
59
RULING (see attached). For the reasons set forth in the attached Ruling, the Court grants in part and denies in part 33 Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Collective Action under the FLSA. The Court ORDERS CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION of this case as an FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION on behalf of all current and former non-exempt employees employed by Defendants at any time from February 2, 2015 to the date of this Order. To participate in this action, current and former employees of Defendants must op t in to the action in a manner consistent with this Ruling. Defendants are ORDERED, within fifteen (15) days of this Order, to produce a list of the names, addresses, compensation rates, telephone numbers, and dates of employment of all non-ex empt employees employed by the Defendants from February 2, 2015 to the date of this Order in an Excel format. Plaintiffs and Defendants are ORDERED to meet and confer on newly-revised Notice of Pendency and Consent Form that incorporate the Court� 39;s rulings as set forth in the Order. The parties should submit joint proposed Notice of Pendency and Consent Form to the Court for final approval within fifteen (15) days of this Order. The parties are also directed to attempt to agree, in mutual good faith, on conspicuous locations within Defendants' restaurants that are suitable for the posting of Notice of Pendency and Consent Form. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on January 2, 2020. (Marienko, A.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
