Finding E-Filing Was ‘Petition for Review,’ Second Circuit Will Consider NLRB Decision
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held Nov. 12 that a petition filed by an Interna- tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers local complied with electronic filing procedures and satisfied the requirement that the National Labor Relations Board be served with a petition ‘‘stamped by the court with the date of filing’’ (Local Union 36, Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. NLRB, 2d Cir., No. 10-3448-ag, 11/12/10).
The court rejected NLRB’s argument that IBEW’s pe- tition for appellate court review of a board decision lacked a date stamp necessary to bring it under the terms of a federal statute governing the filing of mul- tiple petitions in different circuits.
Finding that IBEW Local 36 properly filed with the Second Circuit a petition to review an NLRB decision on the union’s unfair labor practice charges against Rochester Gas & Electric Corp., the court denied NL- RB’s motion to transfer the petition to the District of Co- lumbia Circuit, where the company had filed its own pe- tition for review six days earlier than the union.
Writing for the Second Circuit, Judge Gerard E. Lynch found that while Congress included the date- stamp language in a statute intended to eliminate ‘‘races to the courthouse,’’ applying the requirement literally in a court that adopts electronic filing would lead to an ‘‘absurd result.’’
The complete Daily Labor Report published by Bloomberg BNA can be found here: Finding E-Filing Was ‘Petition for Review,’ Second Circuit Will Consider NLRB Decision