`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`---------------------------------------------------------
`HUI LAN WENG,
`
`
` Plaintiff,
`
`-against-
`
`
`
`
`
`FANCY LEE SUSHI BAR AND GRILL,
`INC., WINNIE LI, individually
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ADOPTION ORDER
`15-cv-5737 (ADS)(ARL)
`
`
`Defendant(s).
`
`---------------------------------------------------------X
`APPEARANCES:
`
`Phillips & Associates, PLLC
`Attorneys for the Plaintiff
`45 Broadway, Suite 620
`New York, NY 10006
`
`By:
`Jessenia Maldonado, Esq.,
`Steven John Fingerhut, Esq., Of Counsel
`
`
`
`William D. Wexler, Esq.
`Attorney for the Defendants
`816 Deer Park Avenue
`
`North Babylon, NY 11703
`
`By: William D. Wexler, Esq., Of Counsel
`
`SPATT, District Judge.
`
`
`
`On May 15, 2017, following a three-day trial, a jury found that the Defendants Fancy Lee
`
`Sushi and Winnie Li (the “Defendants”) discriminated against the Plaintiff Hui Lan Weng (the
`
`“Plaintiff”) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as codified, 42 U.S.C. §
`
`2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) and New York State Executive Law §290, et. seq. (“NYSHRL”). The
`
`jury awarded the Plaintiff $26,000 in back pay damages. The jury did not award any punitive
`
`damages to the Plaintiff.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 2:15-cv-05737-ADS-ARL Document 46 Filed 11/18/17 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 227
`
`
`
`
`
`On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff moved for attorneys’ fees pursuant to Federal Rule of
`
`Civil Procedure 54(d).
`
`
`
`On July 25, 2017, the Court referred the Plaintiff’s motion to Magistrate Judge Arlene R.
`
`Lindsay.
`
`
`
`On November 3, 2017, Judge Lindsay issued a Report and Recommendation (the
`
`“R&R”), recommending that the Plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees be granted; that she be
`
`awarded a total of $51,054.64, comprised of $43,332.80 in attorneys’ fees, and $7,721.84 in
`
`costs. The R&R was served on the parties on the same day via ECF.
`
`
`
`It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have
`
`not filed objections.
`
`
`
`As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this
`
`Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning
`
`and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1
`
`(E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear
`
`error).
`
`
`
`
`
`Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety.
`
`The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment for the Plaintiff in the
`
`amount of $77,054.64, comprised of $26,000 in damages, $43,332.80 in attorneys’ fees, and
`
`$7,721.84 in costs. The Clerk of the Court is further respectfully directed to close the case.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:15-cv-05737-ADS-ARL Document 46 Filed 11/18/17 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 228
`
`
`
`
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`Dated: Central Islip, New York
`
`
`
`November 18, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` _/s/ Arthur D. Spatt_
`
` ARTHUR D. SPATT
`
` United States District Judge
`
`
`
`3
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
