Iuoe 501 v. NLRB
This text of Iuoe 501 v. NLRB (Iuoe 501 v. NLRB) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 7 2020 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
INTERNATIONAL UNION No. 19-70092 OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 501, AFL-CIO, NLRB No. 28-CA-225263
Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Respondent, ______________________________
NP SUNSET LLC, DBA Sunset Station Hotel Casino,
Intervenor.
NP SUNSET LLC, No. 19-70244 DBA Sunset Station Hotel Casino, NLRB No. 28-CA-225263 Petitioner,
v.
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 501, AFL-CIO,
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS No. 19-70279 BOARD, NLRB No. 28-CA-225263 Petitioner,
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEER LOCAL 501, AFL-CIO,
2 On Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board
Argued and Submitted December 3, 2019 San Francisco, California
Before: SILER,** CLIFTON, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
The International Union of Operating Engineers Local 501, AFL- CIO
(“Union”) and NP Sunset LLC, DBA Sunset Station Hotel Casino (“Sunset”) each
petition for review of a January 7, 2019 Order by the National Labor Relations
Board (“Board”). The Board has also filed a cross-application to enforce this
Order against Sunset. We deny both petitions for review and grant the Board’s
cross-application to enforce its Order.
As we have concluded in a case argued together with this one, the Board did
not err in determining that the casino slot technicians are not “guards” under 29
U.S.C. § 159(b)(3). Int’l Union of Operating Eng’rs Local 501 v. NLRB, ___ F.3d
___, No. 18-71124 (9th Cir. ________, 2020).
In addition, the Board did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant the
Union’s request for enhanced remedies. See United Steel Workers of Am. AFL-
CIO-CLC v. NLRB, 482 F.3d 1112, 1116 (9th Cir. 2007). The Board also did not
** The Honorable Eugene E. Siler, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation. 3 err in failing to provide an explanation for its decision to issue standard remedies.
See id. at 1118 (9th Cir. 2007) (“[T]he Board’s decision to order an
unextraordinary remedy does not merit an extraordinary explanation.”).
Petitions for Review DENIED; Cross-Application to Enforce GRANTED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Iuoe 501 v. NLRB, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/iuoe-501-v-nlrb-ca9-2020.