19-3782 Jin v. Shanghai Original, Inc., et al. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ______________ August Term 2020 (Argued: November 19, 2020 | Decided: March 9, 2021) Docket No. 19-3782 JIANMIN JIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHANGHAI ORIGINAL, INC., DBA JOE'S SHANGHAI, EAST BROTHER CORP., DBA JOE'S SHANGHAI, ALWAYS GOOD BROTHERS, INC., DBA JOE'S SHANGHAI, SHANGHAI CITY CORP, DBA JOE'S SHANGHAI, SHANGHAI DUPLICATE CORP, DBA JOE'S SHANGHAI, KIU SANG SI, AKA JOSEPH SI, MIMI SI, YIU FAI FONG, TUN YEE LAM, SOLOMON C. LIOU, Defendants-Appellees. † ______________ Before: LIVINGSTON, Chief Judge; KEARSE, WESLEY, Circuit Judges. Plaintiff-Appellant Jianmin Jin brought a putative class action on behalf of himself and similarly-situated employees of Joe’s Shanghai restaurant alleging violations of the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”). The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Ross, J., Orenstein, M.J.) certified a class † The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the official caption as set forth above. action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) (“Rule 23”) of all non- managerial employees at the Flushing, Queens location of Joe’s Shanghai on the NYLL claims. Five days before the trial was scheduled to start, the district court sua sponte decertified the class, determining that class counsel was no longer adequately representing the class. The court identified class counsel’s plan to call only two class members as witnesses at the trial as the “significant intervening event” triggering decertification. The district court held a bench trial on Jin’s individual claims and entered judgment in favor of Jin against three of the defendants. Jin appeals from the judgment in his favor challenging the court’s pre-trial decertification of the class. He argues that the court abused its discretion in decertifying the class because the significant intervening event the court identified did not justify decertification. We first resolve a jurisdictional issue not raised by the parties. Although Jin prevailed on the merits of his claims, this appeal is not moot because Jin maintains standing as to the class certification issue. On the merits, because class counsel’s conduct made clear that counsel was no longer adequately representing the class, the court acted within its discretion in decertifying the class. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court. _________________ AARON B. SCHWEITZER (John Troy, on the brief), Troy Law, PPLC, Flushing, NY, for Plaintiff-Appellant. DAVID B. HOROWITZ, Fong & Wong, P.C., New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellees. _________________ WESLEY, Circuit Judge: Jianmin Jin was a kitchen worker at the Flushing, Queens location of Joe’s Shanghai restaurant. Jin successfully moved to certify a Rule 23 class action on behalf of himself and all other non-managerial employees at Joe’s Shanghai in Flushing based on alleged violations of their rights under the New York Labor 2 Law. 1 Five days before the class trial, the district court sua sponte decertified the class based on class counsel’s inadequate representation. The court identified class counsel’s plan to call only two class members as witnesses at the trial as the “significant …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals