Sujung Park v. Cove House LLC, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Nevada granted in part defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss Sujung Park’s putative FLSA collective action and related Nevada wage, tip, conversion, unjust-enrichment, and retaliation claims. The court dismissed several claims without prejudice and with leave to amend, declined to dismiss the class and collective allegations at that stage, and limited the action to defendants Cove House LLC and Jihyuk Hwang unless amended allegations support claims against the other defendants. Park was given until January 2, 2026, to file an amended complaint.

Holdings

1. The FLSA and Nevada overtime claims were dismissed without prejudice because Park alleged only that she was not paid overtime during at least one week, without alleging expected work hours or facts showing that her work exceeded forty hours in a workweek.
2. The tip-retention claim was dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend because the complaint did not clearly identify what defendants allegedly did with the tips or provide sufficient factual allegations concerning the putative collective members.
3. The retaliation claim was dismissed without prejudice because Park did not allege facts establishing that she exhausted the administrative requirements applicable to the claim as pleaded.
4. The court denied the request to dismiss the class and collective allegations at that stage, while warning that any amended allegations must contain sufficient factual support demonstrating that collective or class treatment is appropriate.
5. The conversion claim was dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend because the complaint merely recited the elements of conversion and did not plausibly allege facts showing a tortious, willful, and intentional taking of property.
6. The unjust enrichment claim was dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend because Park did not identify which defendant retained the alleged benefit or plead specific facts showing unjust enrichment.
7. The claims against the remaining restaurant defendants were dismissed without prejudice and with leave to amend because Park alleged employment or agency facts sufficient as to Cove House and Hwang but did not allege how the other entities acted as employers or agents under the FLSA.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Park adequately pleaded FLSA and Nevada overtime claims under Rule 12(b)(6).
2. Whether Park adequately pleaded a claim under 29 U.S.C. § 203(m)(2)(B) concerning the retention or distribution of employee tips.
3. Whether Park adequately pleaded an FLSA retaliation claim under 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3).
4. Whether the putative class and FLSA collective allegations should be dismissed at the pleading stage.
5. Whether Park adequately pleaded conversion and unjust enrichment under Nevada law.
6. Whether the complaint alleged a sufficient employment or agency relationship between Park and the defendants other than Cove House and Jihyuk Hwang.

Disposition

other