Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
---------------------------------- -----------------X
BAIYUN FOX, Index No.
704614/2018
Plaintiff,
-against- AFFIRMATION
IN OPPOSITION
SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP.,
Defendant.
------------ ------------------X
STEVEN LOUROS, an attorney duly authorized to practice law in the courts
of the State of New York affirms to the truth of the following under the penalties of
perjury:
1. I am the attorney for the plaintiff and am familiar with the facts and
circumstances regarding this matter based upon the records and file maintained by
my office.
2. J respectfully make this affirmation in opposition to the order to show
cause by Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP ("Movant"). It will be
demonstrated by irrefutable documentary evidence that on the date of the subject
incident, ie, July 14,2017 (the "Incident Date"), the defendant, Super HK Main
Street Corp., was the entity doing business at 37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY (the
"Subject Premises") and it was conducting business under the trade name Super HK
Supermarket, the alleged non-party Movant.
1
1 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
3. It will also be shown by incontestable documentary evidence that the
alleged sublease was fabricated between two related entities so that the defendant
could avoid payment of plaintiff's valid judgment and to restrain the Marshal's sale.
THE DEFENDANT SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP.
WAS DOING BUSINESS AT THE SUBJECT LOCATION
UNDER THE TRADE NAME SUPER HK SUPERMARKET
4. A computer search of public records evidences the following (see
Exhibit "A"):
"SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP (doing business as SUPER
HK SUPERMARKET) is a retail food store licensed by New
York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM).
The license number for this location is 724941. The address is
37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11354. The county is Queens.
In my telephone conversation with the New York State Department of Agriculture
and Markets they confirmed that the retail food store license in effect at 37-11 Main
Street, Flushing on July 14, 2017 was issued to the defendant Super HK Main Street
Corp. and that defendant was conducting business under the name of Super HK
Supermarket. I was also informed that the license expired in 2018.
ON THE INCIDENT DATE, THE SUBJECT SUPERMARKET
WAS INSURED UNDER THE DEFENDANT'S NAME
5. Before the instant litigation was commenced, I sent a letter dated July
24, 2017 to Super HK Supermarket (Movant) by overnight mail, advising it of the
2
2 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
incident and asking Movant to forward the letter to their insurance carrier. A copy
of my letter is annexed as Exhibit "B".
6. In response to my letter, defendant's insurance carrier sent me a letter
dated August 24, 2017, advising me that, on the Incident Date, the policy holder at
the Subject Premises was the defendant Super HK Main Street Corp. A copy of the
insurance company letter is annexed as Exhibit "C". Thus, on the Incident Date, the
retail food store license to sell food products to the general public, including the
plaintiff, was in defendant's name and the insurance policy of the Subject Premises
were all in defendant's name, ie, Super HK Main Street Corp.
THE ALLEGED SUBLEASE WAS BACKDATED
AND IS BETWEEN TWO RELATED ENTITIES
7. The moving affidavit by Jeffrey Wu, the alleged general partner of
movant Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, L.P., is disingenuous. Mr. Wu is no
stranger to my law firm and he is no stranger to attempting to evade payment of
lawful debts.
8. My office obtained a judgment in the sum of $900,542.00 against Mr.
Wu and his wife Veronica Wu, Exhibit "D". Mr. Wu a/k/a Myint Kyaw a/k/a Myint
J. Kyaw and Veronica Wu, recently filed for bankruptcy (see Exhibit "E").
9. In his moving affidavit, Wu claims that Super HK Supermarket of
Flushing, LP entered into an alleged sublease, Exhibit "F", with Hong Kong Plaza
Management Corp. dated August 18, 2016. Wu failed to disclose that he is also the
3
3 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
Chief Executive Officer of the sublessor, Hong Kong Plaza Management Corp. See
Exhibit "G". An examination of the alleged sublease reveals that Wu had someone
else sign on behalf of Hong Kong Plaza Management Corp so that the signature of
sublessor would not be the same as the sublesee's signature.
10. In addition, the rent in the alleged sublease commenced on September
"5"
1, 2016 (see paragraph of Exhibit "F"). But the certificate of authority, Exhibit
"H", authorizing the Movant to collect sales tax was not validated until ten months
later on June 29, 2017. Thus, the Movant, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, could
not sell food items or collect sale tax at the Subject Premises during that period.
Indeed, the Movant could not sell retail food items on the Incident Date since the
retail food license was in the name of the defendant!
11. Interestingly, the outdoor sign on the Subject Premises, Exhibit "I",
only states "Super HK". This was done to deceive creditors. In fact, the defendant
Super Hong Kong Main Street Corp still advertises the sale of food products on the
internet at the Subject Premises (see Exhibit "J").
12. Importantly, the Wu affidavit states that "from July 17, 2017 through
today, only the Movant was operating the Premises and not the entity named as a
defendant in this action". But plaintiff's accident occurred on July 14, 2017. Thus,
Movant has failed to identify the entity that conducted business on July 14, 2017 and
4
4 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
has utterly failed to meet its burden of likelihood of success on the merits to warrant
injunctive relief.
MOVANT'S CLAIM THAT IT HAD NO NOTICE
OF THIS LAWSUIT, UNTIL THE CITY MARSHAL
CAME KNOCKING ON THE DOOR. IS FALSE
13. In the Wu affidavit, he makes the bald statement that (paragraph "9"):
"The Movant had no knowledge of the lawsuit until the City
Marshal came to take inventory of the property of the Marshal
Sale."
This statement is not true. On February 20, 2019, an RJI was filed listing Super HK
Supermarket as a secondary defendant, Exhibit "K". On May 30, 2019, the note of
issue was mailed by first class mail to Super HK Supermarket at 3711 Main Street,
Flushing, NY 11355, Exhibit "L". On May 30, 2019, a copy of the default judgment
order with notice of entry was mailed by first class mail to Super HK Supermarket
at 3711 Main Street, Flushing, NY, Exhibit "M". Movant had ample notice of this
litigation. Again, Wu has made a misleading and false statement which is disproved
by documentary evidence.
JEFFREY WU HAS NOT BEEN CANDID WITH THE COURT
14. Mr. Wu has made blatant misrepresentations and concealment of facts
in his moving affidavit.
15. Wu has made the following misrepresentations in his moving affidavit:
5
5 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
a. Paragraph "5". "At no time was the defendant an operator of the
business located within the Premises";
b. Paragraph "7". "The defendant has nothing to do with the
Premises";
c. Paragraph "7". "The defendant is not in any way connected to the
ownership, management, or operations of the Premises".
On March 17, 2021, a judicial subpoena duces tecum, Exhibit "N", was served upon
the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets. The State's response is annexed
as Exhibit "O".
16. As stated previously, Jeffrey Wu is also known as Myint Kyaw and
"D"
Myint J. Kyaw (see Exhibits and "E"). In the State's response to the subpoena
duces tecum, it provided a copy of defendant's application for a food processing
establishment license at the Subject Premises. The application lists Myint J. Kyaw
as the president of defendant, Super HK Main Street Corp. with its principal offices
at 37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY! The application is signed by Mint J. Kyaw
a/k/a Jeffrey Wu! The application was signed on October 8, 2016. Thus on October
2016 - two months after the alleged sublease was Mr. Wu represented to
8, signed,
the State of New York that defendant was the entity conducting business at the
Subject Premises. The license expired on October 20, 2018 (see Exhibit "O"). Thus,
the defendant was the only entity licensed to conduct a retail food business at that
6
6 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
location until October 20, 2018, which was done under Movant's trade name. As a
result, both Movant and defendant are liable for payment of plaintiff's valid
judgment.
17. Wu's sworn statements that defendant never operated a business at that
location; that defendant has nothing to do with the Premises; that defendant is not in
any way connected to the ownership, management or operation of the premises are
false.
18. Also, attached as part of Exhibit "O", is a Sanitary Inspection Report
dated October 7, 2016, which lists:
"Super HK Main Street Corp.
Super HK Supermarket
37-11 Main Street
Flushing, NY 11354
as the operator of the retail store at that location. The inspection report states that
Super HK Main Street Corp. d/b/a Super HK Supermarket were "operating without
license"
the required at the Subject Premises. The Establishment Number for the
license is 724941.
19. Based upon the foregoing incontestable documentary evidence, it is
respectfully requested that this court deny the order to show cause and state in its
decision that the assets of the Movant are subject to the Marshal's sale and Judgment.
ARGUMENT
20. It is settled law that a trade name has no separate legal existence from
7
7 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
the entity doing business under that name. In Habibian v. Sudmann's Srv &
(1st
Diagnostics, 57 Misc.3d 770 Dist. Nassau County, 2017), the court stated:
name'
Use of a so-called 'trade does not create a separate legal
entity. (the trade name of a legal entity does not have a separate
legal existence'). See, The Mason Tenders, Dist. Council
Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund and Training Prog,
Fund v. Faulkner, 484 F.Supp.2d 254, 257 (S.D.N.Y.2007)
("Doing business under another name does not create an entity
[distinct] from the person operating the business").
While a trade name does not create a separate legal entity, the
entity doing business under the trade name, whether corporation
or individual, remains liable for all of its obligations... the
owners of the trade name and the trade name entities are one and
the same. A fictitious or assumed business name, a trade name,
is not a legal entity; rather it is merely a description of the person
or corporation doing business under that name.
Thus, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP is the same entity as defendant Super
HK Main Street Corp. and Movant is liable for defendant's debts.
21. In any event, the Movant, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP, did
not have a retail food license on the Incident Date at the Subject Premises, and all
8
8 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
sales were being made under the defendant's retail food license. Furthermore, the
liability insurance on Subject Premises on the Incident Date was under the
defendant's name which was the only entity licensed to operate a retail food business
at that location.
22. In sum, the moving affidavit by Jeffrey Wu omits the fact that he is the
chief executive officer of the alleged sublessor. Wu fails to explain his relationship
with the defendant or to disclose that he is defendant's president. The validation
dated on the certificate of authority for the Movant is inconsistent with the rent
commencement date in the sublease.
23. The Movant cannot supplement his moving papers by submitting
affidavits and documents that should have been including in its moving papers.
Midland Mortgage Company v. Imtiaz, 110 AD3d 773 (2d Dept. 2013).
24. The touch stone in the Second Department for granting of a preliminary
injection is a likelihood of success on the merits. In Lombard v. Station Sq. Inn Apts
Corp.. 94 AD3d 717 (2d Dept., 2011), the court reversed the trial court holding, inter
alia, that the movant failed to prove a likelihood of success on the merits. In the
present case, the Movant has utterly failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on
the merits.
25. If the court should grant injunctive relief, the Movant should be ordered
to post a bond in the amount of the judgment. CPLR 6313(c).
9
9 of 10
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021
26. Based upon the egregious falsehoods and concealment of relevant facts
in the moving affidavit, itis no surprise that the Movant failed to submit a certificate
pursuant to court rule 130.1-1(a). The order to show cause should be denied for
failing to contain a court rule 130.1-1(a) certification which court rule was
specifically enacted for frivolous motions such as the present order to show cause.
27. Based upon the foregoing documentary proof, it is respectfully
submitted that the order to show cause be denied with sanctions, costs and legal fees.
Dated: New York, New York
March 22, 2021
SL/jp Steven Louros, Esq.
10
10 of 10
Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS ---------------------------------- -----------------X BAIYUN FOX, Index No. 704614/2018 Plaintiff, -against- AFFIRMATION IN OPPOSITION SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP., Defendant. ------------ ------------------X STEVEN LOUROS, an attorney duly authorized to practice law in the courts of the State of New York affirms to the truth of the following under the penalties of perjury: 1. I am the attorney for the plaintiff and am familiar with the facts and circumstances regarding this matter based upon the records and file maintained by my office. 2. J respectfully make this affirmation in opposition to the order to show cause by Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP ("Movant"). It will be demonstrated by irrefutable documentary evidence that on the date of the subject incident, ie, July 14,2017 (the "Incident Date"), the defendant, Super HK Main Street Corp., was the entity doing business at 37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY (the "Subject Premises") and it was conducting business under the trade name Super HK Supermarket, the alleged non-party Movant. 1 1 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 3. It will also be shown by incontestable documentary evidence that the alleged sublease was fabricated between two related entities so that the defendant could avoid payment of plaintiff's valid judgment and to restrain the Marshal's sale. THE DEFENDANT SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP. WAS DOING BUSINESS AT THE SUBJECT LOCATION UNDER THE TRADE NAME SUPER HK SUPERMARKET 4. A computer search of public records evidences the following (see Exhibit "A"): "SUPER HK MAIN STREET CORP (doing business as SUPER HK SUPERMARKET) is a retail food store licensed by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (NYSDAM). The license number for this location is 724941. The address is 37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11354. The county is Queens. In my telephone conversation with the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets they confirmed that the retail food store license in effect at 37-11 Main Street, Flushing on July 14, 2017 was issued to the defendant Super HK Main Street Corp. and that defendant was conducting business under the name of Super HK Supermarket. I was also informed that the license expired in 2018. ON THE INCIDENT DATE, THE SUBJECT SUPERMARKET WAS INSURED UNDER THE DEFENDANT'S NAME 5. Before the instant litigation was commenced, I sent a letter dated July 24, 2017 to Super HK Supermarket (Movant) by overnight mail, advising it of the 2 2 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 incident and asking Movant to forward the letter to their insurance carrier. A copy of my letter is annexed as Exhibit "B". 6. In response to my letter, defendant's insurance carrier sent me a letter dated August 24, 2017, advising me that, on the Incident Date, the policy holder at the Subject Premises was the defendant Super HK Main Street Corp. A copy of the insurance company letter is annexed as Exhibit "C". Thus, on the Incident Date, the retail food store license to sell food products to the general public, including the plaintiff, was in defendant's name and the insurance policy of the Subject Premises were all in defendant's name, ie, Super HK Main Street Corp. THE ALLEGED SUBLEASE WAS BACKDATED AND IS BETWEEN TWO RELATED ENTITIES 7. The moving affidavit by Jeffrey Wu, the alleged general partner of movant Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, L.P., is disingenuous. Mr. Wu is no stranger to my law firm and he is no stranger to attempting to evade payment of lawful debts. 8. My office obtained a judgment in the sum of $900,542.00 against Mr. Wu and his wife Veronica Wu, Exhibit "D". Mr. Wu a/k/a Myint Kyaw a/k/a Myint J. Kyaw and Veronica Wu, recently filed for bankruptcy (see Exhibit "E"). 9. In his moving affidavit, Wu claims that Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP entered into an alleged sublease, Exhibit "F", with Hong Kong Plaza Management Corp. dated August 18, 2016. Wu failed to disclose that he is also the 3 3 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 Chief Executive Officer of the sublessor, Hong Kong Plaza Management Corp. See Exhibit "G". An examination of the alleged sublease reveals that Wu had someone else sign on behalf of Hong Kong Plaza Management Corp so that the signature of sublessor would not be the same as the sublesee's signature. 10. In addition, the rent in the alleged sublease commenced on September "5" 1, 2016 (see paragraph of Exhibit "F"). But the certificate of authority, Exhibit "H", authorizing the Movant to collect sales tax was not validated until ten months later on June 29, 2017. Thus, the Movant, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, could not sell food items or collect sale tax at the Subject Premises during that period. Indeed, the Movant could not sell retail food items on the Incident Date since the retail food license was in the name of the defendant! 11. Interestingly, the outdoor sign on the Subject Premises, Exhibit "I", only states "Super HK". This was done to deceive creditors. In fact, the defendant Super Hong Kong Main Street Corp still advertises the sale of food products on the internet at the Subject Premises (see Exhibit "J"). 12. Importantly, the Wu affidavit states that "from July 17, 2017 through today, only the Movant was operating the Premises and not the entity named as a defendant in this action". But plaintiff's accident occurred on July 14, 2017. Thus, Movant has failed to identify the entity that conducted business on July 14, 2017 and 4 4 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 has utterly failed to meet its burden of likelihood of success on the merits to warrant injunctive relief. MOVANT'S CLAIM THAT IT HAD NO NOTICE OF THIS LAWSUIT, UNTIL THE CITY MARSHAL CAME KNOCKING ON THE DOOR. IS FALSE 13. In the Wu affidavit, he makes the bald statement that (paragraph "9"): "The Movant had no knowledge of the lawsuit until the City Marshal came to take inventory of the property of the Marshal Sale." This statement is not true. On February 20, 2019, an RJI was filed listing Super HK Supermarket as a secondary defendant, Exhibit "K". On May 30, 2019, the note of issue was mailed by first class mail to Super HK Supermarket at 3711 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11355, Exhibit "L". On May 30, 2019, a copy of the default judgment order with notice of entry was mailed by first class mail to Super HK Supermarket at 3711 Main Street, Flushing, NY, Exhibit "M". Movant had ample notice of this litigation. Again, Wu has made a misleading and false statement which is disproved by documentary evidence. JEFFREY WU HAS NOT BEEN CANDID WITH THE COURT 14. Mr. Wu has made blatant misrepresentations and concealment of facts in his moving affidavit. 15. Wu has made the following misrepresentations in his moving affidavit: 5 5 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 a. Paragraph "5". "At no time was the defendant an operator of the business located within the Premises"; b. Paragraph "7". "The defendant has nothing to do with the Premises"; c. Paragraph "7". "The defendant is not in any way connected to the ownership, management, or operations of the Premises". On March 17, 2021, a judicial subpoena duces tecum, Exhibit "N", was served upon the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets. The State's response is annexed as Exhibit "O". 16. As stated previously, Jeffrey Wu is also known as Myint Kyaw and "D" Myint J. Kyaw (see Exhibits and "E"). In the State's response to the subpoena duces tecum, it provided a copy of defendant's application for a food processing establishment license at the Subject Premises. The application lists Myint J. Kyaw as the president of defendant, Super HK Main Street Corp. with its principal offices at 37-11 Main Street, Flushing, NY! The application is signed by Mint J. Kyaw a/k/a Jeffrey Wu! The application was signed on October 8, 2016. Thus on October 2016 - two months after the alleged sublease was Mr. Wu represented to 8, signed, the State of New York that defendant was the entity conducting business at the Subject Premises. The license expired on October 20, 2018 (see Exhibit "O"). Thus, the defendant was the only entity licensed to conduct a retail food business at that 6 6 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 location until October 20, 2018, which was done under Movant's trade name. As a result, both Movant and defendant are liable for payment of plaintiff's valid judgment. 17. Wu's sworn statements that defendant never operated a business at that location; that defendant has nothing to do with the Premises; that defendant is not in any way connected to the ownership, management or operation of the premises are false. 18. Also, attached as part of Exhibit "O", is a Sanitary Inspection Report dated October 7, 2016, which lists: "Super HK Main Street Corp. Super HK Supermarket 37-11 Main Street Flushing, NY 11354 as the operator of the retail store at that location. The inspection report states that Super HK Main Street Corp. d/b/a Super HK Supermarket were "operating without license" the required at the Subject Premises. The Establishment Number for the license is 724941. 19. Based upon the foregoing incontestable documentary evidence, it is respectfully requested that this court deny the order to show cause and state in its decision that the assets of the Movant are subject to the Marshal's sale and Judgment. ARGUMENT 20. It is settled law that a trade name has no separate legal existence from 7 7 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 the entity doing business under that name. In Habibian v. Sudmann's Srv & (1st Diagnostics, 57 Misc.3d 770 Dist. Nassau County, 2017), the court stated: name' Use of a so-called 'trade does not create a separate legal entity. (the trade name of a legal entity does not have a separate legal existence'). See, The Mason Tenders, Dist. Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund and Training Prog, Fund v. Faulkner, 484 F.Supp.2d 254, 257 (S.D.N.Y.2007) ("Doing business under another name does not create an entity [distinct] from the person operating the business"). While a trade name does not create a separate legal entity, the entity doing business under the trade name, whether corporation or individual, remains liable for all of its obligations... the owners of the trade name and the trade name entities are one and the same. A fictitious or assumed business name, a trade name, is not a legal entity; rather it is merely a description of the person or corporation doing business under that name. Thus, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP is the same entity as defendant Super HK Main Street Corp. and Movant is liable for defendant's debts. 21. In any event, the Movant, Super HK Supermarket of Flushing, LP, did not have a retail food license on the Incident Date at the Subject Premises, and all 8 8 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 sales were being made under the defendant's retail food license. Furthermore, the liability insurance on Subject Premises on the Incident Date was under the defendant's name which was the only entity licensed to operate a retail food business at that location. 22. In sum, the moving affidavit by Jeffrey Wu omits the fact that he is the chief executive officer of the alleged sublessor. Wu fails to explain his relationship with the defendant or to disclose that he is defendant's president. The validation dated on the certificate of authority for the Movant is inconsistent with the rent commencement date in the sublease. 23. The Movant cannot supplement his moving papers by submitting affidavits and documents that should have been including in its moving papers. Midland Mortgage Company v. Imtiaz, 110 AD3d 773 (2d Dept. 2013). 24. The touch stone in the Second Department for granting of a preliminary injection is a likelihood of success on the merits. In Lombard v. Station Sq. Inn Apts Corp.. 94 AD3d 717 (2d Dept., 2011), the court reversed the trial court holding, inter alia, that the movant failed to prove a likelihood of success on the merits. In the present case, the Movant has utterly failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits. 25. If the court should grant injunctive relief, the Movant should be ordered to post a bond in the amount of the judgment. CPLR 6313(c). 9 9 of 10 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/22/2021 02:01 PM INDEX NO. 704614/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 35 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/22/2021 26. Based upon the egregious falsehoods and concealment of relevant facts in the moving affidavit, itis no surprise that the Movant failed to submit a certificate pursuant to court rule 130.1-1(a). The order to show cause should be denied for failing to contain a court rule 130.1-1(a) certification which court rule was specifically enacted for frivolous motions such as the present order to show cause. 27. Based upon the foregoing documentary proof, it is respectfully submitted that the order to show cause be denied with sanctions, costs and legal fees. Dated: New York, New York March 22, 2021 SL/jp Steven Louros, Esq. 10 10 of 10