FirstAlerts
Food Safety Inspections

Shiki Buffet in Chicago Failed Its Inspection

The restaurant failed a Risk 1 (High) health inspection on August 5, 2026, and received another failing result on August 13, 2026.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 12:56 p.m. ET
, located at in , , Illinois, failed its health inspection on August 5, 2026, according to City of public health inspection data. The establishment was inspected again on August 13, 2026, with the result recorded as "". During the August 5 inspection, the facility was cited for multiple violations. Inspectors observed cold TCS foods held at improper temperatures ranging between 46.8 and 81.5 degrees Fahrenheit, including sweet potatoes, shrimp, raw eggs in shell, sushi, fish, chicken, garlic in oil, and cheesecake. A manager voluntarily discarded and denatured 100 lbs of food valued at $400. Inspectors also noted a handwashing soap dispenser in the front prep area that was not dispensing soap, which was replaced before the conclusion of the inspection. Other observations reported by inspectors included openings at outer doors and damaged screen doors, uncovered shrimp in the walk-in freezer, unwrapped self-service dessert and condiments, and two food handlers cooking without hair restraints. The inspection also cited knives and rice spoons stored in water containers, self-service utensils stored flat, boxes of vegetables stored on walk-in cooler and freezer floors, liquid waste water and debris around dumpsters, buildup on floors and lower walls in dishwashing and prep areas, a dimly lit walk-in cooler, and a lack of required allergen awareness training documentation for one certified employee.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 16:56current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.