Metro Atlanta News

CitiesExplore

Cajun Hibachi LLC scores 96; inspectors cite food storage issues

Inspected

6335 GA-85 HWY UNIT 110 RIVERDALE, GA 30274

Map ↗

Cajun Hibachi LLC received an A, scoring 96 out of 100, in a Clayton County food-service inspection on Nov 13, 2026. The official report lists two findings. [1]

Inspection score

96/100Grade AOfficial inspection

Inspection summary

Inspection purpose: Routine

The inspector observed raw shrimp being prepared in vegetable sink. [2]

The report states: “Coved molding damaged/missing in several areas in kitchen.” [3]

The report marks one finding as corrected on site. [4]

What inspectors found

Read the official report

Showing 2 of 2 findings

  1. Food storage and contamination

    Item 12A
    Observed raw shrimp being prepared in vegetable sink. Food is to be prepared in proper areas.
    Inspector’s full note

    Code 511-6-1.04(4)(t)

    Observed raw shrimp being prepared in vegetable sink. Food is to be prepared in proper areas. Had pic move shrimp to the proper sink. Corrected On-Site. New Violation.
    Official report · Item 12A ↗
    Corrected on siteNew violation
  2. Facility maintenance and cleanliness

    Item 17C
    Coved molding damaged/missing in several areas in kitchen. Build-up present on seal above three compartment sink in kitchen.
    Inspector’s full note

    Code 511-6-1.07(5)(a),(b)

    Coved molding damaged/missing in several areas in kitchen. Build-up present on seal above three compartment sink in kitchen. Floors and seals shall be properly maintained. New Violation.
    Official report · Item 17C ↗
    New violation

Correction and repeat labels quote the report. An absent label leaves correction status unknown; a deadline does not confirm a correction.

Inspection history 1

Official history ↗
  1. This report
    96/100A
    Reading

Sources

Record details & methodology
Authority
Clayton County
Inspection ID
57562535
Facility ID
12982597
Record captured
Venue address source
Official listing ·

Scores and findings describe the dated inspection, not current operating conditions. A correction deadline does not establish whether an issue remained unresolved afterward.

Findings quote the official report captured . “Corrected on site” and “repeat” reflect explicit report markers. “COS” and “CA” in the inspector’s notes refer to corrections and corrective actions; an instruction to act is not proof that it was completed.

History links the same official facility ID within the issuing authority and may omit intervening inspections. Same-day results have no inferred sequence. Report excerpts follow source order, not a severity ranking.

This report comes from Clayton County. History includes only this authority’s exact facility ID.

Georgia’s grading scale
A
90–100
B
80–89
C
70–79
U
0–69
Georgia food-service rules ↗

Checked