Preview
Me
S. Calvin Myung, Esq. (SBN 216853) FILED
VOX TRIAL ATTORNEYS ALAMEDA COUNTY
3600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1510
Los Angeles, CA 90010 APR 28 2021
Nh
Tel. (213) 382-3600 meee OF TE
E-mail: scmyung(@voxtrial.com
ARMs
W
Attorneys for Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI Deputy
ff
oO
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
BD
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
ALAMEDA COUNTY COURTHOUSE |
DWN
HYUN SOOK CHOI, an Individual CseN¥y 691098622
o
10 Plaintiff,
VS.
COMPLAINT FOR:
11
SUTTER HEALTH., a California corporation;
12 ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY, an (1) MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
unknown entity; AMI YAMAMOTO, M.D., an (2) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF
individual, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
13
14 and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive,
15 Defendants.
16
17
18 Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI alleges:
19 THE PARTIES
20 1. Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI (“CHOI”) is, and at all relevant times herein, was a
21 65-years old woman residing in Orange County, California.
22 2. Defendant SUTTER HEALTH (“SUTTER HEALTH” or “Defendant”) is, and
23 at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, a corporation duly licensed, authorized and
24 permitted to conduct business in California with its principal place for doing business in the
x04 Ag Pp Olls
25 County of Alameda, State of California.
26 3. Defendant ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY (“ALTA BATES” or
27 “Defendant”) is, and at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, an entity duly licensed,
28
-l-
COMPLAINT
authorized and permitted to conduct business in California with its principal place for doing
business in the County of Alameda, State of California.
No
4. Defendant AMI YAMAMOTO M_D., (“DR. YAMAMOTO” or “Defendant”)
WD
is, and at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, an individual residing in the County
ff
of Alameda, State of California.
oa
5. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or
nn
otherwise, of the defendants herein named as DOES 1-20, (collectively herein referred to as
“I
“Defendants”) are unknown to Plaintiff who, therefore, sues said defendants by such fictitious
names; and leave of court will be asked to amend this complaint to show their true names and
10 capacities when the same have become ascertained.
11 6. At all times herein mentioned, each of the defendants herein named as a DOE 1-
12 20, was, and still is, legally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings herein
13 referred to and proximately caused all injuries and damages to plaintiff, thereby, as herein alleged.
14
15 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
16 7. The Court has jurisdiction over Defendants because they have their principal place
17 of business and/or reside within this county, derived benefits from the state, directed its activities
18 in and to this state, entered into an agreement with Plaintiff in this county, and/or the acts or
19 injuries to Plaintiff occurred in this county.
20 8. Venue is proper in this county pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §
21 395(a), and 395.5, in that the action involves the acts and injuries to Plaintiff occurred in this
22 county, and the obligations and liabilities arose in this county.
23
24 NATURE OF THIS ACTION AND RELIEF SOUGHT
25 9. This lawsuit arises out of an injury suffered by CHOI resulting from a negligent
26 act or omission by the Defendants in rendering medical services, which was a proximate cause of
27 personal injury to CHOI.
28
-2-
COMPLAINT
10. As more specifically alleged herein, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages from her
appendix bursting inside, which should have been easily detected when CHOI first visited the
Emergency Room at SUTTER HEALTH due to abdominal pain. Defendants’ negligence brought
WwW
about physical, mental, disfigurement and emotional injuries.
fh
Bn
SUMMARY OF FACTS
11. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant DR. YAMAMOTO was, and now is, a
nN
physician, licensed by the State of California to practice medicine in the State of California.
A
12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant SUTTER HEALTH was the master
o
10 and/or employer of the DR. YAMAMOTO, who, at all times herein mentioned, was acting within
the course and scope of their agency, employment and/or joint venture.
12 13. DR. YAMAMOTO held herself out to the public at large and to Plaintiff, in
13 particular, as fully qualified physician and surgeon, duly licensed to practice her profession in the
14 State of California, and exercising prudent, reasonable judgment and care in the selection,
15 employment and control of qualified, trained, experienced nurses, nurse practitioners, nursing
16 personnel, orderlies, assistants, aides and employees under their supervision, control, direction,
17 responsibility and authority while performing services and caring for patients including, but not
18 limited to, the Plaintiff.
19 14. ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY, at all times herein mentioned, owned, ©
20 operated, managed, controlled and administered an outpatient medical service facility in the
21 Alameda County and held itself out to the public at large, and to plaintiff in particular, as a
22 properly equipped, fully accredited, competently staffed outpatient medical facility with qualified
23 and prudent personnel, and operating in compliance with the standard of care maintained in other
24 properly and efficiently treated and administered, accredited facilities in the Northern California
25 medical community; and said defendant, SUTTER HEALTH administered, governed, controlled,
26 managed and directed all the necessary functions, activities and operations of said facility.
27 Ml
28 HI
-3-
COMPLAINT
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
i)
(As against All Defendants)
WwW
15. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint and
ff
incorporates the same herein by this reference as if those paragraphs were set forth in full herein.
a
16. On or about May 14, 2020, CHOI visited the Emergency Room at SUTTER
DBD
HEALTH due to an abdominal pain. CHOI was given laboratory/radiology tests at the SUTTER
PN
HEALTH Radiology that were ordered by DR. YAMAMOTO and resulted by a Phillip J. Rich,
MD.
Oo
10 17. On the same day, on May 14, 2020 at around 7 p.m., Dr. Brian A. Yokers,
11 reviewed the results of the tests, conducted a physical exam, and advised CHOI that nothing was
12 wrong. The physician prescribed HY DROCodone and Ibuprofen, and advised CHOI to visit her
13 local hospital when returned back home to Southern California.
14 18. | CHOI called SUTTER HEALTH the very next day, on May 15, 2020, when her
15 abdominal pain intensified with stomach swelling followed by vomiting and diarrhea. SUTTER
16 HEALTH advised it could be upset stomach, and simply advised CHOI to take the prescribed
17 medications.
18 19. On the following day, May 16, 2020, CHOI’s pain exacerbated, prompting her to
19 go to urgent care, which promptly directed CHOI to Emergency Room at UCSF. UCSF advised
20 CHOI that her appendix had already burst inside.
21 20. On the following day, May 17, 2020, CHOJ had surgery at UCSF to remove all the
22 discharges inside through a tube around her buttock.
23 21. Only on August 7, 2020, was CHOI able to remove her appendix at UCSF.
24 22. At all times herein mentioned, CHOI was in the exclusive control of the
25 defendants, and each of them.
26 23. That the treatment performed by defendants, and each of them, and by defendants’
27 employees, and each of them, upon CHOI, negligently failed to conform to the standard of care
28 both with respect to the care and treatment rendered to CHOI, including but not limited to failing
-4.-
COMPLAINT
to report on issues related to CHOI’s appendix, despite noting certain very obvious indicators of
an appendix issue, which should have prompted the Defendants with different course of treatment
i)
and services by the ER doctor.
W
24. Without limiting other acts or omissions by SUTTER HEALTH, it is clear that
f&
SUTTER HEALTH’s radiology deviated from and fell below the standard of care. Specifically,
a
the elevated white blood cell count, presence of inflamed portion showing obvious appendicolith,
nn
size being 1.5 centimeter, 2 times larger size than the normal size, among other things, should
™
have alerted radiology that there was an infection and issues with the appendix.
25. At all times herein mentioned, the defendant, SUTTER HEALTH, negligently and
10 carelessly failed to properly ensure the character, quality, ability and competence of individuals,
11 including the remaining defendants, and each of them, treating patients in said medical office and
12 as a proximate result thereof, CHOI was caused to, and did, suffer injuries and damages
13 proximately thereby, as herein alleged. For a period before the events herein set forth,
14 defendants, and each of them, undertook to, and did, treat CHOI and agreed to diagnose such
15 conditions as CHOI might have and to render proper care in respect thereto, and to do all things
16 necessary and proper in connection therewith; and the defendants, and each of them, thereafter
17 entered on such employment individually and by and through their employees, agents and
18 servants.
19 26. From and after said times, defendants, and each of them, so negligently examined
20 CHOI and diagnosed and failed to diagnose her condition and so negligently treated her, and so
21 negligently cared for CHOI while she was in the exclusive control of the defendants, and each of
22 them, and so negligently operated, managed, maintained, selected, designed, controlled and
23 conducted their services, activities, personnel and equipment in connection with CHOI’s care and
24 treatment that the same proximately caused the injuries, damages and detriment to CHOI as
25 herein alleged.
26 27. Asa proximate result of the said conduct of the defendants, and each of them,
27 CHOI was injured to her body and in her health, disfigurement, strength and activities, and
28 sustained injury to her mental health and shock and, all of which have caused and continue to
-5-
COMPLAINT
cause CHOI great mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering. CHOI is informed and
believes and thereon alleges that some or all of said injuries will be of a permanent nature and
will result in some permanent disability to CHOI, all to her general damages in the sum within the
Ww
jurisdiction of this court.
ff
28. Asa further proximate result of the said misconduct of the defendants, and each of
Dn
them, CHOI was required to, and did, employ physicians, surgeons and hospitals to examine,
treat, and care for her, and did incur, and will in the future incur, medical and other related
DN
expenses in connection herewith, the exact amount of which costs, fees and expenses are
unknown to CHOI at this time, but will be shown according to the proof at the time of trial.
oo
10 29. That prior to the filing of the within complaint, three years have not elapsed from
11 the date of injury and a period of less than one calendar year has not yet elapsed after CHOI first
12 learned, or had a reasonable opportunity to learn, of the fact that the injuries suffered and
13 complained of herein were a proximate result of the negligent acts or omissions of the defendants,
14 and each of them, although the defendants, and each of them, knew, or should have known, that
15 their negligence and the relationship between CHOI’s injuries and their negligence existed, but
16 the defendants, and each of them, failed to disclose these facts and circumstances to the CHOI.
17 30. In accordance with Cal. Code. Civ. Pro. §364, Plaintiff sent notice to defendants
18 on December 23, 2020 that Plaintiff intend to file an action for damages based on negligence on
19 or after 90 days from date of the notice.
20 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
21 NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
22 (As against All Defendants)
23 31. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint and
24 incorporates the same herein by this reference as if those paragraphs were set forth in full herein.
25 32. Defendants were negligent in that on or about May 14, 2020, CHOI is informed
26 and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants were gravely negligent in failing to detect an
27 obvious symptoms of appendicitis that should not and could not have been missed by the
28 numerous indicators, such as enlarged size, obvious presence of appendicolith, enhanced wall
-6-
COMPLAINT
showing more blood flow shown in all of the radiology images, on different angles, axil, slides,
wholistic views, and etc.
i)
33. Asaresult of the Defendant’s negligence, CHOI suffered serious emotional
WwW
distress.
ff
34. | Defendants’ negligence was a substantial factor in causing CHOI’s serious
a
emotional distress, including severe depression, nightmares, mental anguish, irritability, anxiety,
nn
short-temper, moodiness, difficulty sleeping, social withdrawal, tearfulness, and anger.
™I
35. As aresult, CHOI sustained damages.
PRAYER
10 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against defendants, and each of them, as follows:
11 (1) For general damages according to proof;
12 (2) For special damages according to proof;
13 (3) For costs of hospital and medical expenses according to proof;
14 (4) For prejudgment interest according to law;
15 (5) For costs of suit herein incurred; and
16 (6) For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.
17
18
19 DATED: April 27, 2021 /s/ Calvin Myung
S. Calvin Myung, Esq.
20 Attorneys for Plaintiff
HYUN SOOK CHOI
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-7-
COMPLAINT
Preview
Me S. Calvin Myung, Esq. (SBN 216853) FILED VOX TRIAL ATTORNEYS ALAMEDA COUNTY 3600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1510 Los Angeles, CA 90010 APR 28 2021 Nh Tel. (213) 382-3600 meee OF TE E-mail: scmyung(@voxtrial.com ARMs W Attorneys for Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI Deputy ff oO SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA BD COUNTY OF ALAMEDA ALAMEDA COUNTY COURTHOUSE | DWN HYUN SOOK CHOI, an Individual CseN¥y 691098622 o 10 Plaintiff, VS. COMPLAINT FOR: 11 SUTTER HEALTH., a California corporation; 12 ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY, an (1) MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE unknown entity; AMI YAMAMOTO, M.D., an (2) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF individual, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 13 14 and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI alleges: 19 THE PARTIES 20 1. Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI (“CHOI”) is, and at all relevant times herein, was a 21 65-years old woman residing in Orange County, California. 22 2. Defendant SUTTER HEALTH (“SUTTER HEALTH” or “Defendant”) is, and 23 at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, a corporation duly licensed, authorized and 24 permitted to conduct business in California with its principal place for doing business in the x04 Ag Pp Olls 25 County of Alameda, State of California. 26 3. Defendant ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY (“ALTA BATES” or 27 “Defendant”) is, and at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, an entity duly licensed, 28 -l- COMPLAINT authorized and permitted to conduct business in California with its principal place for doing business in the County of Alameda, State of California. No 4. Defendant AMI YAMAMOTO M_D., (“DR. YAMAMOTO” or “Defendant”) WD is, and at all relevant times herein, was and continues to be, an individual residing in the County ff of Alameda, State of California. oa 5. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or nn otherwise, of the defendants herein named as DOES 1-20, (collectively herein referred to as “I “Defendants”) are unknown to Plaintiff who, therefore, sues said defendants by such fictitious names; and leave of court will be asked to amend this complaint to show their true names and 10 capacities when the same have become ascertained. 11 6. At all times herein mentioned, each of the defendants herein named as a DOE 1- 12 20, was, and still is, legally responsible in some manner for the events and happenings herein 13 referred to and proximately caused all injuries and damages to plaintiff, thereby, as herein alleged. 14 15 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 16 7. The Court has jurisdiction over Defendants because they have their principal place 17 of business and/or reside within this county, derived benefits from the state, directed its activities 18 in and to this state, entered into an agreement with Plaintiff in this county, and/or the acts or 19 injuries to Plaintiff occurred in this county. 20 8. Venue is proper in this county pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 21 395(a), and 395.5, in that the action involves the acts and injuries to Plaintiff occurred in this 22 county, and the obligations and liabilities arose in this county. 23 24 NATURE OF THIS ACTION AND RELIEF SOUGHT 25 9. This lawsuit arises out of an injury suffered by CHOI resulting from a negligent 26 act or omission by the Defendants in rendering medical services, which was a proximate cause of 27 personal injury to CHOI. 28 -2- COMPLAINT 10. As more specifically alleged herein, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages from her appendix bursting inside, which should have been easily detected when CHOI first visited the Emergency Room at SUTTER HEALTH due to abdominal pain. Defendants’ negligence brought WwW about physical, mental, disfigurement and emotional injuries. fh Bn SUMMARY OF FACTS 11. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant DR. YAMAMOTO was, and now is, a nN physician, licensed by the State of California to practice medicine in the State of California. A 12. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant SUTTER HEALTH was the master o 10 and/or employer of the DR. YAMAMOTO, who, at all times herein mentioned, was acting within the course and scope of their agency, employment and/or joint venture. 12 13. DR. YAMAMOTO held herself out to the public at large and to Plaintiff, in 13 particular, as fully qualified physician and surgeon, duly licensed to practice her profession in the 14 State of California, and exercising prudent, reasonable judgment and care in the selection, 15 employment and control of qualified, trained, experienced nurses, nurse practitioners, nursing 16 personnel, orderlies, assistants, aides and employees under their supervision, control, direction, 17 responsibility and authority while performing services and caring for patients including, but not 18 limited to, the Plaintiff. 19 14. ALTA BATES CAMPUS LABORATORY, at all times herein mentioned, owned, © 20 operated, managed, controlled and administered an outpatient medical service facility in the 21 Alameda County and held itself out to the public at large, and to plaintiff in particular, as a 22 properly equipped, fully accredited, competently staffed outpatient medical facility with qualified 23 and prudent personnel, and operating in compliance with the standard of care maintained in other 24 properly and efficiently treated and administered, accredited facilities in the Northern California 25 medical community; and said defendant, SUTTER HEALTH administered, governed, controlled, 26 managed and directed all the necessary functions, activities and operations of said facility. 27 Ml 28 HI -3- COMPLAINT FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE i) (As against All Defendants) WwW 15. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint and ff incorporates the same herein by this reference as if those paragraphs were set forth in full herein. a 16. On or about May 14, 2020, CHOI visited the Emergency Room at SUTTER DBD HEALTH due to an abdominal pain. CHOI was given laboratory/radiology tests at the SUTTER PN HEALTH Radiology that were ordered by DR. YAMAMOTO and resulted by a Phillip J. Rich, MD. Oo 10 17. On the same day, on May 14, 2020 at around 7 p.m., Dr. Brian A. Yokers, 11 reviewed the results of the tests, conducted a physical exam, and advised CHOI that nothing was 12 wrong. The physician prescribed HY DROCodone and Ibuprofen, and advised CHOI to visit her 13 local hospital when returned back home to Southern California. 14 18. | CHOI called SUTTER HEALTH the very next day, on May 15, 2020, when her 15 abdominal pain intensified with stomach swelling followed by vomiting and diarrhea. SUTTER 16 HEALTH advised it could be upset stomach, and simply advised CHOI to take the prescribed 17 medications. 18 19. On the following day, May 16, 2020, CHOI’s pain exacerbated, prompting her to 19 go to urgent care, which promptly directed CHOI to Emergency Room at UCSF. UCSF advised 20 CHOI that her appendix had already burst inside. 21 20. On the following day, May 17, 2020, CHOJ had surgery at UCSF to remove all the 22 discharges inside through a tube around her buttock. 23 21. Only on August 7, 2020, was CHOI able to remove her appendix at UCSF. 24 22. At all times herein mentioned, CHOI was in the exclusive control of the 25 defendants, and each of them. 26 23. That the treatment performed by defendants, and each of them, and by defendants’ 27 employees, and each of them, upon CHOI, negligently failed to conform to the standard of care 28 both with respect to the care and treatment rendered to CHOI, including but not limited to failing -4.- COMPLAINT to report on issues related to CHOI’s appendix, despite noting certain very obvious indicators of an appendix issue, which should have prompted the Defendants with different course of treatment i) and services by the ER doctor. W 24. Without limiting other acts or omissions by SUTTER HEALTH, it is clear that f& SUTTER HEALTH’s radiology deviated from and fell below the standard of care. Specifically, a the elevated white blood cell count, presence of inflamed portion showing obvious appendicolith, nn size being 1.5 centimeter, 2 times larger size than the normal size, among other things, should ™ have alerted radiology that there was an infection and issues with the appendix. 25. At all times herein mentioned, the defendant, SUTTER HEALTH, negligently and 10 carelessly failed to properly ensure the character, quality, ability and competence of individuals, 11 including the remaining defendants, and each of them, treating patients in said medical office and 12 as a proximate result thereof, CHOI was caused to, and did, suffer injuries and damages 13 proximately thereby, as herein alleged. For a period before the events herein set forth, 14 defendants, and each of them, undertook to, and did, treat CHOI and agreed to diagnose such 15 conditions as CHOI might have and to render proper care in respect thereto, and to do all things 16 necessary and proper in connection therewith; and the defendants, and each of them, thereafter 17 entered on such employment individually and by and through their employees, agents and 18 servants. 19 26. From and after said times, defendants, and each of them, so negligently examined 20 CHOI and diagnosed and failed to diagnose her condition and so negligently treated her, and so 21 negligently cared for CHOI while she was in the exclusive control of the defendants, and each of 22 them, and so negligently operated, managed, maintained, selected, designed, controlled and 23 conducted their services, activities, personnel and equipment in connection with CHOI’s care and 24 treatment that the same proximately caused the injuries, damages and detriment to CHOI as 25 herein alleged. 26 27. Asa proximate result of the said conduct of the defendants, and each of them, 27 CHOI was injured to her body and in her health, disfigurement, strength and activities, and 28 sustained injury to her mental health and shock and, all of which have caused and continue to -5- COMPLAINT cause CHOI great mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering. CHOI is informed and believes and thereon alleges that some or all of said injuries will be of a permanent nature and will result in some permanent disability to CHOI, all to her general damages in the sum within the Ww jurisdiction of this court. ff 28. Asa further proximate result of the said misconduct of the defendants, and each of Dn them, CHOI was required to, and did, employ physicians, surgeons and hospitals to examine, treat, and care for her, and did incur, and will in the future incur, medical and other related DN expenses in connection herewith, the exact amount of which costs, fees and expenses are unknown to CHOI at this time, but will be shown according to the proof at the time of trial. oo 10 29. That prior to the filing of the within complaint, three years have not elapsed from 11 the date of injury and a period of less than one calendar year has not yet elapsed after CHOI first 12 learned, or had a reasonable opportunity to learn, of the fact that the injuries suffered and 13 complained of herein were a proximate result of the negligent acts or omissions of the defendants, 14 and each of them, although the defendants, and each of them, knew, or should have known, that 15 their negligence and the relationship between CHOI’s injuries and their negligence existed, but 16 the defendants, and each of them, failed to disclose these facts and circumstances to the CHOI. 17 30. In accordance with Cal. Code. Civ. Pro. §364, Plaintiff sent notice to defendants 18 on December 23, 2020 that Plaintiff intend to file an action for damages based on negligence on 19 or after 90 days from date of the notice. 20 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 21 NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 22 (As against All Defendants) 23 31. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all prior paragraphs of this Complaint and 24 incorporates the same herein by this reference as if those paragraphs were set forth in full herein. 25 32. Defendants were negligent in that on or about May 14, 2020, CHOI is informed 26 and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants were gravely negligent in failing to detect an 27 obvious symptoms of appendicitis that should not and could not have been missed by the 28 numerous indicators, such as enlarged size, obvious presence of appendicolith, enhanced wall -6- COMPLAINT showing more blood flow shown in all of the radiology images, on different angles, axil, slides, wholistic views, and etc. i) 33. Asaresult of the Defendant’s negligence, CHOI suffered serious emotional WwW distress. ff 34. | Defendants’ negligence was a substantial factor in causing CHOI’s serious a emotional distress, including severe depression, nightmares, mental anguish, irritability, anxiety, nn short-temper, moodiness, difficulty sleeping, social withdrawal, tearfulness, and anger. ™I 35. As aresult, CHOI sustained damages. PRAYER 10 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against defendants, and each of them, as follows: 11 (1) For general damages according to proof; 12 (2) For special damages according to proof; 13 (3) For costs of hospital and medical expenses according to proof; 14 (4) For prejudgment interest according to law; 15 (5) For costs of suit herein incurred; and 16 (6) For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper. 17 18 19 DATED: April 27, 2021 /s/ Calvin Myung S. Calvin Myung, Esq. 20 Attorneys for Plaintiff HYUN SOOK CHOI 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -7- COMPLAINT