Cheng et al v. Wong et al
Plaintiff: Jiayi Cheng, Jason Li and Shin-Yueh Kao
Defendant: Hau Yi Wong, Niki Wong and Eyeview Optical LLC
Case Number: 1:2024cv01507
Filed: February 28, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Lois Bloom
Referring Judge: Allyne R Ross
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 16, 2024 Filing 10 First MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Eyeview Optical LLC, Hau Yi Wong. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit State Court Complaint, #2 Exhibit 9.20.23 Attorney's Letter to Plaintiffs) (Kung, Thomas)
March 26, 2024 NOTICE. The court has reviewed the parties' pre-motion letters concerning defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss and determined that a pre-motion conference is not necessary. The court therefore grants defendants permission to bring the motion. Note: defendants' motion should also further brief the question of whether plaintiffs' state law claims fall within this court's supplemental jurisdiction. See Tantaros v. Fox News Network, LLC, 12 F.4th 135, 141 (2d Cir. 2021) ("The removing defendant has the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction."). The court directs that the motion shall be briefed as follows: defendants' motion and supporting papers shall be served no later than April 15, 2024; plaintiffs' opposition papers shall be served no later than May 3, 2024; defendants' reply papers, if any, shall be served no later than May 14, 2024. The fully briefed motion shall be filed in accordance with chambers' rules, including courtesy copies for chambers, no later than May 14, 2024. This schedule may be altered only with the permission of the court. (GJ)
March 21, 2024 Filing 9 Letter Response to Defendants' Request for Pre-Motion Conference by Jiayi Cheng, Shin-Yueh Kao, Jason Li (Chen, Yimin)
March 12, 2024 Filing 8 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Jiayi Cheng, Shin-Yueh Kao, Jason Li (Chen, Yimin)
March 12, 2024 Filing 7 Letter Request for Pre-Motion Conference by Eyeview Optical LLC, Hau Yi Wong (Kung, Thomas)
March 12, 2024 NOTICE. Defendants have submitted a letter requesting a pre-motion conference on an anticipated motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs' counsel is reminded that, under Judge Ross's Individual Motion Practices, plaintiffs are required to file a responsive letter addressing the legal and factual bases of the anticipated motion within seven business days from service of defendants' letter, on or before March 21, 2024. (GJ)
March 11, 2024 Filing 6 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Order dated March 5, 2024 served on Plaintiffs on March 11, 2024, filed by Eyeview Optical LLC, Hau Yi Wong. (Dolan, Brian)
March 11, 2024 Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Brian J. Dolan on behalf of All Defendants (aty to be noticed) (Dolan, Brian)
March 5, 2024 Opinion or Order ORDER: Defendants removed this FLSA action from Queens County Supreme Court, invoking this Court's federal question jurisdiction. ECF No. #1 . Defendants shall respond to plaintiffs' complaint by March 12, 2024. Any party seeking a trial by jury shall file a jury demand by that date. Fed. R. Civ. P. 81(c)(3)(A). Defendants shall serve a copy of this Order on plaintiffs' counsel and file proof of service on the docket forthwith. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom on 3/5/2024. (VP)
March 4, 2024 Filing 4 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Notice of Removal served on Jiayi Cheng, Jason Li and Shin-Yueh Kao on 3/4/2024, filed by Eyeview Optical LLC, Hau Yi Wong. (Kung, Thomas)
February 29, 2024 Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (CV)
February 29, 2024 Filing 2 Clerk's Notice Re: Consent. A United States Magistrate Judge has been assigned to this case and is available to conduct all proceedings. In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent, the assigned Magistrate Judge is available to conduct all proceedings in this action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to this Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. Any party may withhold its consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent.The form may also be accessed at the following link: #https://img.nyed.uscourts.gov/files/forms/MJConsentForm.pdf (CV)
February 29, 2024 This case has been opened in the Eastern District of New York. If you plan to continue representing your client(s), you must be admitted to practice before this court. You must do so by applying for Pro Hac Vice or permanent admission. To apply for Pro Hac Vice admission, you must first register for an ECF login and password. Please visit the Court's website at www.nyed.uscourts.gov/attorney-admissions for guidance. Once registered, you must electronically file a Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. You must pay the required pro hac vice fee online. (CV)
February 28, 2024 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Eyeview Optical LLC, Hau Yi Wong from Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Queens, case number 700102/2024. ( Filing fee $ 405 receipt number ANYEDC-17616897) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A) (Kung, Thomas)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cheng et al v. Wong et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Hau Yi Wong
Represented By: Thomas Hsien Chih Kung
Represented By: Brian J. Dolan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Niki Wong
Represented By: Thomas Hsien Chih Kung
Represented By: Brian J. Dolan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Eyeview Optical LLC
Represented By: Thomas Hsien Chih Kung
Represented By: Brian J. Dolan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jiayi Cheng
Represented By: Yimin Chen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jason Li
Represented By: Yimin Chen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Shin-Yueh Kao
Represented By: Yimin Chen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?