No, the article says 31 violations, and there was a follow-up inspection. That's fairly normal for the food industry - only the absolute most severe violations would shut down the operation.
The article doesn't make it clear the inspections are related, particularly given the first inspection was on the same date some of the guests reported falling ill.
Edit: Here's the related story about the violations[1]. The article mentions the business was open on the 14th, the day after the follow-up inspection. So it does not appear they were closed due to any health inspection related reason.
You can read the list of 31 violations - they are all mostly benign, and pretty typical for many restuarants.
