[TENTATIVE] RULING:
The court GRANTS the motion and sets aside the entered default against defendants NIW USA, Inc. and Samuel Jinkyoo Kang. The court GRANTS Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the amount of $750 against Defendants’ counsel, Todd A. Fuson.
Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment is MOOT.
Defendants to give notice.
Background
Plaintiff Justin Jennings (“Jennings” or “Plaintiff”) alleges he was employed by Defendant NIW USA, Inc. (“NIW”), which is allegedly an unlicensed law firm that employs attorneys and non-attorneys to provide legal services related to immigration to foreign nationals and immigrants who are present in the United States. First Am. Compl. (“FAC”) ¶¶ 8-9. Defendant Samuel Jinkyoo Kang (“Kang”) was allegedly the proprietor, principal, and CEO of NIW. Id. NIW and Kang will collectively be referred to as “Defendants.”
According to Plaintiff, he performed work that was no different from that of a nonexempt legal secretary but was misclassified as a
Type
Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
[TENTATIVE] RULING:
The court GRANTS the motion and sets aside the entered default against defendants NIW USA, Inc. and Samuel Jinkyoo Kang. The court GRANTS Plaintiff attorney’s fees in the amount of $750 against Defendants’ counsel, Todd A. Fuson.
Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment is MOOT.
Defendants to give notice.
Background
Plaintiff Justin Jennings (“Jennings” or “Plaintiff”) alleges he was employed by Defendant NIW USA, Inc. (“NIW”), which is allegedly an unlicensed law firm that employs attorneys and non-attorneys to provide legal services related to immigration to foreign nationals and immigrants who are present in the United States. First Am. Compl. (“FAC”) ¶¶ 8-9. Defendant Samuel Jinkyoo Kang (“Kang”) was allegedly the proprietor, principal, and CEO of NIW. Id. NIW and Kang will collectively be referred to as “Defendants.”
According to Plaintiff, he performed work that was no different from that of a nonexempt legal secretary but was misclassified as a