PORT CHARLOTTE, FL. State inspectors cited Misaki Sushi on Kings Highway for eight high-severity violations on June 3, 2026, including a finding that the restaurant had not followed parasite-destruction procedures for its fish — a direct risk to anyone who ordered raw or lightly cooked seafood. The restaurant was not closed.

Parasite-destruction procedures require that fish served raw, such as the salmon and tuna found on any standard sushi menu, be frozen to specific temperatures for specific lengths of time before service. Without that step, parasites including Anisakis roundworms and tapeworms can survive in the fish and infect customers. Inspectors found no documentation that Misaki Sushi had followed those procedures.

That was one of eight high-priority findings documented in a single visit.

What Inspectors Found

1HIGHParasite destruction procedures not followedDirect infection risk
2HIGHFood from unapproved or unknown sourceNo safety traceability
3HIGHEmployee not reporting illness symptomsOutbreak enabler
4HIGHInadequate handwashing facilitiesHygiene infrastructure failure
5HIGHImproper hand and arm washing techniquePathogens transferred to food
6HIGHInadequate shell stock identification/recordsShellfish traceability failure
7HIGHNo consumer advisory for raw/undercooked foodsVulnerable customers uninformed
8HIGHPerson in charge not present or performing dutiesManagement failure
9INTMulti-use utensils not properly cleanedBacterial biofilm risk
10INTSingle-use items improperly reusedCross-contamination risk
11INTInadequate or improperly maintained toilet facilitiesHygiene infrastructure failure

Inspectors also cited the restaurant for sourcing food from unapproved or unknown suppliers. At a sushi restaurant, that finding is particularly significant: it means some of the raw fish on customers' plates arrived without having passed through USDA- or FDA-regulated channels, and without any paper trail connecting it to a licensed processor.

The shellfish-traceability violation compounded that concern. Inspectors found inadequate shell stock identification records, meaning oysters, clams, or other shellfish served at the restaurant could not be traced to a licensed harvester if a customer got sick.

Employees were also cited for not reporting illness symptoms, and for improper handwashing technique. Inspectors separately found that the handwashing facilities themselves were inadequate, meaning the physical infrastructure for hygiene was insufficient even before the technique problem was documented.

No consumer advisory was posted for raw or undercooked foods. At a sushi restaurant, where raw fish is the central product, that omission leaves customers with compromised immune systems, pregnant women, the elderly, and young children with no written warning about the risks they are taking.

The person in charge was either not present or not performing supervisory duties during the inspection.

What These Violations Mean

The parasite-destruction and unapproved-source violations, taken together, describe a situation where raw fish of unknown origin was being served to customers without the freezing protocols that kill parasites. Anisakis, the most common parasite found in raw marine fish, causes severe abdominal pain, vomiting, and in some cases requires surgical removal from the gastrointestinal tract. The freezing requirement exists specifically to eliminate that risk before the fish reaches a plate.

The illness-reporting failure is a different category of danger. Food workers who do not report symptoms such as vomiting, diarrhea, or jaundice are the primary driver of multi-victim norovirus and hepatitis A outbreaks. A single infected employee handling raw fish at a sushi bar can expose dozens of customers in a single shift.

The handwashing violations, both the inadequate facilities and the improper technique, mean that even employees who intended to wash their hands were not doing so effectively. Pathogens including Salmonella and E. coli survive on hands that are rinsed but not properly scrubbed, and transfer directly to food during preparation.

The missing consumer advisory may seem like a paperwork issue. It is not. State law requires that advisory because raw fish carries inherent risk even when handled correctly. Without it, a customer who is immunocompromised or pregnant has no way of knowing the restaurant is serving food that health regulators have specifically flagged as higher risk.

The Longer Record

The June 2026 inspection was the eleventh on record for Misaki Sushi, and the worst. The restaurant has accumulated 70 total violations across those inspections and has never been emergency-closed.

Every single prior inspection in the available record included high-severity violations. The August 2022 inspection produced six high-severity findings. January 2023 produced five. August 2024 produced five. The February 2026 inspection, just four months before this one, produced four high-severity violations and one intermediate. None of those prior visits produced a closure order.

The violations documented in June 2026 are not a sudden departure from an otherwise clean record. They are an escalation of a pattern that has been visible in state records since at least 2022.

The specific categories of concern, food sourcing, shellfish traceability, parasite protocols, and handwashing infrastructure, are not the kind of violations that appear by accident on a single bad day. They reflect systemic gaps in how the restaurant sources its food and manages its kitchen.

Open for Business

Eight high-severity violations at a raw-fish restaurant, including findings about the safety of the fish supply itself and the absence of any illness-reporting system among staff, did not result in an emergency closure order on June 3, 2026.

Misaki Sushi on Kings Highway remained open after the inspection.