Filed: March 28, 2013
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1410
(5-CA-36213; 5-CA-36214; 5-CA-36216;
5-CA-36306; 5-CA-36225)
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Petitioner,
v.
ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS, INC.; ECI OF WASHINGTON, LLC, alter
egos,
Respondents,
ASBESTOS WORKERS LOCAL 24 APPRENTICESHIP FUND; ASBESTOS
WORKERS LOCAL 24 PENSION FUND; ASBESTOS WORKERS LOCAL 24
MEDICAL FUND,
Intervenors.
O R D E R
The Court amends its opinion filed March 28, 2013, as
follows:
On the cover sheet, agency information section, “On
Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Labor Relations
Authority” is corrected to read “On Application for Enforcement
of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board”
For the Court – By Direction
/s/ Patricia S. Connor
Clerk
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-1410
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,
Petitioner,
v.
ENGINEERING CONTRACTORS, INC.; ECI OF WASHINGTON, LLC, alter
egos,
Respondents,
ASBESTOS WORKERS LOCAL 24 APPRENTICESHIP FUND; ASBESTOS
WORKERS LOCAL 24 PENSION FUND; ASBESTOS WORKERS LOCAL 24
MEDICAL FUND,
Intervenors.
On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor
Relations Board. (NLRB-1 5-CA-36213; 5-CA-36214; 5-CA-36216; 5-
CA-36306; 5-CA-36225)
Submitted: March 26, 2013 Decided: March 28, 2013
Before DUNCAN, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Petition granted by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert J. Englehart, Supervisory Attorney, Lafe E. Solomon,
Acting General Counsel, Celeste J. Mattina, Deputy General
Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Linda
Dreeben, Deputy Associate General Counsel, Gregoire Sauter,
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Washington, D.C., for
Petitioner. Kenneth C. Gauvey, OFFIT KURMAN, P.A., Owings
Mills, Maryland, for Respondent. John R. Mooney, Andrew K. Lin,
MOONEY, GREEN, SAINDON, MURPHY & WELCH, P.C., Washington, D.C.,
for Intervenors.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
The National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) seeks
enforcement of a Board order against Engineering Contractors,
Inc. (“Respondent”). The Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”)
concluded that Respondent violated § 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) of
the National Labor Relations Act (“the Act”), 29 U.S.C.
§ 158(a)(1), (3), (5) (2006), and ordered remedial measures.
The Board adopted the ALJ’s recommended order in full.
Respondent opposes the Board’s petition for
enforcement, contending that the remedies ordered by the ALJ
were overreaching and impermissibly punitive. We conclude that
we lack jurisdiction to consider Respondent’s contentions
because Respondent failed to raise its objections to the
remedies ordered in the proceedings before the Board. See 29
U.S.C. § 160(e) (2006) (“No objection that has not been urged
before the Board . . . shall be considered by the court, unless
the failure or neglect to urge such objection shall be excused
because of extraordinary circumstances.”); Woelke & Romero
Framing, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 456 U.S. 645, 665 (1982) (barring
from judicial review issues not raised before Board);
N.L.R.B. v. Daniel Constr. Co., 731 F.2d 191, 198 (4th Cir.
1984) (same).
Accordingly, we grant the Board’s motion to submit the
case on briefs and the petition for enforcement. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal conclusions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION GRANTED
4
NLRB v. Engineering Contractors, Inc.
Combined Opinion