United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ex rel. LISA MADIGAN, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, Plaintiffs,
XING YING EMPLOYMENT AGENCY, a/k/a SHUN YING EMPLOYMENT AGENCY; ZHU YING ZHANG, individually and in her official capacity as owner; JUN JIN CHEUNG, individually and in his official capacity as owner, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Z. Lee United States District Judge
People of the State of Illinois, the Illinois Department of
Labor, and Lisa Madigan (collectively,
“Plaintiffs”) brought suit against several
employment agencies and their client restaurants, alleging
violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(“Title VII”) and other federal and state civil
rights and employment laws. Plaintiffs allege that the
agencies and restaurants engaged in discriminatory and
abusive treatment of Hispanic employees. Most defendants have
settled, but Defendant Xing Ying Employment Agency
(“Xing Ying”) and its owners, Zhu Ying Zhang
(“Zhang”) and Jun Jin Cheung
have now moved for partial summary judgment against
Defendants on their Title VII claim for discrimination in
advertising. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiffs'
motion is granted as to Xing Ying and denied as to Zhang and
Ying is an unlicensed employment agency located in Chicago.
Pls.' LR 56.1(a)(3) Stmt. ¶¶ 5, 7, ECF No. 109.
Xing Ying finds jobs and refers and places workers into those
jobs for a commission. Id. ¶ 6. The agency is
co-owned by Zhang and Cheung and operated by Zhang.
Id. ¶¶ 8-13.
Journal is a widely circulated daily Chinese-language
newspaper. Id. ¶¶ 17, 18. Its Chicago
edition is distributed in downtown Chicago and the
surrounding suburban areas. Id. ¶ 19. World
Journal sells advertising placements, with the
advertising customer determining the content of the
advertisement, as well as the frequency of the
advertisement's publication. Id. ¶¶
22-24. Xing Ying placed daily advertisements in the World
Journal almost continually from April 12, 2011 until
October 31, 2015. Id. ¶¶ 25-27. From April
12, 2011 through July 17, 2012, Xing Ying's
advertisements included the following language:
Chicago Xingying Employment Agency Please contact Ms. Zhang
Tel: 312-791-1558 312-791-1503 Cell: 312-927-9958 Lots of
Honest and sincere (provide the best Mexicans) Sushi and
teppanyaki Station pickup service Open 7 days, 24 hour
service Add.: 2228 S. Archer Ave., Chicago, IL 60616
Id. ¶ 29. The advertisements from July 18, 2012
through October 31, 2015 were substantively identical to the
above advertisement, except that they also advertised
“All trades and professions, ” after the words
“Sushi and teppanyaki.” Id. ¶ 30.
court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the
movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). To survive summary judgment, the
nonmoving party must “do more than simply show that
there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts,
” Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 586 (1986), and instead must
“establish some genuine issue for trial such that a
reasonable jury could return a verdict in her favor.”
Gordon v. FedEx Freight, Inc., 674 F.3d 769, 772-73
(7th Cir. 2012). In reviewing a motion for summary judgment,
the Court gives the nonmoving party “the benefit of
conflicts in the evidence and reasonable inferences that
could be drawn from it.” Grochocinski v. Mayer
Brown Rowe & Maw, LLP, 719 F.3d 785, 794 (7th Cir.
2013). The Court must not make credibility determinations or
weigh conflicting evidence. McCann v. Iroquois Mem'l
Hosp., 622 F.3d 745, 752 (7th Cir. 2010).
have moved for partial summary judgment on Count II of their
Amended Complaint, which alleges that Defendants violated
Title VII by engaging in discriminatory advertising.
Pls.' Mem. Supp. Mot. Summ. J. at 1, ECF No. 108.
Specifically, Plaintiffs claim that Defendants'
advertisements unlawfully expressed a preference or
specification for “Mexicans” or persons of Latino
origin in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(b). Am.
Compl. ¶¶ 85, 86.
Background on ...