Pasha Automotive Services

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 22, 2018

20-CA-195343 (N.L.R.B. Jun. 22, 2018)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
PASHA AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES
and Case 20-CA-195343
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND
WAREHOUSE UNION
ORDER
The Employer’s petition to revoke subpoena duces tecum B-1-WNMN9R is
denied. The subpoena seeks information relevant to the matters under investigation
and describes with sufficient particularity the evidence sought, as required by Section
11(1) of the Act and Section 102.31(b) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations. Further,
the Employer has failed to establish any other legal basis for revoking the subpoena.
See generally NLRB v. North Bay Plumbing, Inc., 102 F.3d 1005 (9th Cir. 1996); NLRB
v. Carolina Food Processors, Inc., 81 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1996).1
Dated, Washington, D.C., June 22, 2018
JOHN F. RING CHAIRMAN
MARK GASTON PEARCE, MEMBER
MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER

1 The Employer’s argument that the subpoena should be revoked because the unfair
labor practice charge is barred by Sec. 10(b) is without merit. Issues regarding Sec.
10(b) are generally not addressed in an investigative subpoena context. See, e.g.,
NLRB v. The Bakersfield Californian, 128 F.3d 1339, 1341 (9th Cir. 1997) (“Like other
defenses to an unfair labor practice complaint, a section 10(b) statute of limitations
defense is not properly evaluated in a subpoena enforcement proceeding.”).
To the extent that the Employer has provided some of the requested material, it
is not required to produce that information again, provided that the Employer accurately
describes which documents under subpoena it has already provided, states whether
those previously provided documents constitute all of the requested documents, and
provides all of the information that was subpoenaed.