IUOE 501 V. NLRB, No. 19-70092 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 7 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL NO. 501, AFL-CIO, No. 19-70092 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, DBA Sunset Station Hotel Casino, No. 19-70244 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, Respondent, ______________________________ INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 501, AFL-CIO, Intervenor. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, No. 19-70279 NLRB No. 28-CA-225263 Petitioner, v. NP SUNSET LLC, DBA Sunset Station Hotel Casino, Respondent, ______________________________ INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEER LOCAL 501, AFL-CIO, Intervenor. 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. AFLCIO-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. 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
