Hoang Minh Le v. Doe, dba Jade House Seafood and BBQ Restaurant

Filing 58

JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF HOANG MINH LE AGAINST DEFENDANTS by Judge R. Gary Klausner. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. That Plaintiff recover $4,000.00 in statutory damages under the Unruh Civil Rights Act from Defendant; 2. That Plaintiff r ecover $600.00 in attorney's fees from Defendant; 3. That Plaintiff recover $540.00 in costs from Defendants; 4. That Defendants are enjoined to ensure that accessible barriers at the Property 1126 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, C A 91765 from which the business "Jade House Seafood" operates (the Property) are removed and/or corrected, including but not limited to ensuring that restrooms at the Property are accessible, as specified under the law; 5. That the action be, and is hereby dismissed. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (lom)

1
2
3
4
5

PAMELA TSAO (SBN: 266734)
JS-6
ASCENSION LAW GROUP
17802 Irvine Blvd.
Suite A117
NOTE: CHANGES MADE BY THE COURT
Tustin, CA 92780
PH: 714.783.4220
FAX: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff HOANG MINH LE

6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

HOANG MINH LE, an individual,

Case No.: 5:16-cv-02271-RGK-DTB

12

Plaintiff,

[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT FOR
PLAINTIFF HOANG MINH LE
AGAINST DEFENDANTS

13
14
15
16
17
18

vs.
GIANG GUO QI, an individual dba
“JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD & BBQ
RESTAURANT”; and GANG WANG,
an individual dba “JADE HOUSE
SEAFOOD & BBQ RESTAURANT”;
ROIC DBTC, LLC, a limited liability
company,

[Hon. R. Gary Klausner presiding]

Defendants.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER
5:16-CV-02271-RGK-DTB

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

[PROPOSED] ORDER
On May 7, 2018, the Court entered an order granting plaintiff HOANG MINH
LE’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for default judgment against GIANG GUO QI, an individual
dba “JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD & BBQ RESTAURANT”; and GANG WANG, an
individual dba “JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD & BBQ RESTAURANT”; (collectively,
“Defendants”). Consequently,
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED
1. That Plaintiff recover $4,000.00 in statutory damages under the Unruh Civil
Rights Act from Defendant;
2. That Plaintiff recover $600.00 in attorney’s fees from Defendant;
3. That Plaintiff recover $540.00 in costs from Defendants;
4. That Defendants are enjoined to ensure that accessible barriers at the
Property 1126 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., Diamond Bar, CA 91765 from which
the business “Jade House Seafood” operates (the “Property”) are removed
and/or corrected, including but not limited to ensuring that restrooms at the
Property are accessible, as specified under the law;
5. That the action be, and is hereby dismissed.

18
19
20

Dated: May 15, 2018

21

Hon. R. Gary Klausner
District Court Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
5:16-CV-02271-RGK-DTB

1

PROOF OF SERVICE

2
3
4

CASE NAME:

Le vs. Doe, dba JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD AND BBQ, et al.

CASE NUMBER:

5:16-CV-02271-RGK-DTB

5

7

I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age
of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 17802 Irvine Blvd
Suite 117, Tustin, CA 92780

8

On May 15, 2018, I served the foregoing document described as:

9

[PROPOSED] ORDER

6

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

in this action by transmitting a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope
addressed as follows:
GIANG GUO QI, an individual dba “JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD & BBQ
RESTAURANT”;
GANG WANG, an individual dba “JADE HOUSE SEAFOOD & BBQ
RESTAURANT”
1126 S. Diamond Bar Blvd
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
[X] BY MAIL
[X] I deposited such envelope in the mail at Tustin, California. The envelope
was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid.
[X] As follows: I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection
and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited
with U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Tustin,
California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party
served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is
more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
Dated: May 15, 2018

/s/ Pamela Tsao
Pamela Tsao

23
24
25
26
27
28

2
[PROPOSED] ORDER
5:16-CV-02271-RGK-DTB