From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carpenters Union v. National Labor rel

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 22, 2007
219 F. App'x 654 (9th Cir. 2007)

Opinion

Nos. 04-76138, 05-71904, 05-72762.

January 22, 2007.

David A. Rosenfeld, Esq., Caren P. Sencer, Esq., Weinberg Roger Rosenfeld, Alameda, CA, for Carpenters Union Local No. 1109, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, Local No. 1109, a/w United Brotherhood of Capenters Joinders of American, AFL-CIO.

Regional Director, Alan B. Reichard, National Labor Relations Board Region 32, Oakland, CA, Aileen A. Armstrong, Esq., Meredith L. Jason, Attorney, Daniel A. Blitz, Esq., National Labor Relations Board Contempt Litigation Compliance Branch, Washington, DC, for National Labor Relations Board.

Joshua L. Ditelberg, Esq., Seyfarth Shaw, LLP, Chicago, IL, Robert W. Tollen, Esq., Seyfarth Shaw, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Champion Home Builders Co.

Before: SCHROEDER, Chief Circuit Judge, FARRIS and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

The National Labor Relation Board's Motion for Clarification and for Extension of Time to File Proposed Judgment is GRANTED.

The memorandum disposition in this case, Carpenters Union Local No. 1109 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 209 Fed.Appx. 692 (9th Cir. 2006), is hereby amended to include a final paragraph that reads as follows:

This case is REMANDED to the Board for further proceedings consistent with this disposition.

The Board shall have fourteen days from the date this Order is entered within which to submit its proposed judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 19.


Summaries of

Carpenters Union v. National Labor rel

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jan 22, 2007
219 F. App'x 654 (9th Cir. 2007)
Case details for

Carpenters Union v. National Labor rel

Case Details

Full title:CARPENTERS UNION LOCAL NO. 1109, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jan 22, 2007

Citations

219 F. App'x 654 (9th Cir. 2007)