International Longshore and Warehouse Union v. Pacific Maritime Association

Filing 29

SECOND ORDER POSTPONING ENFORCEMENT OF LABOR ARBITRATION SUBPOENA Motion Hearing set for 1/26/2012 03:00 PM in Courtroom 8, 19th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. William Alsup.. Signed by Judge Alsup on December 22, 2011. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/22/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 No. C 11-05222 WHA 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE AND WAREHOUSE UNION, 12 Petitioner, 13 14 15 v. PACIFIC MARITIME ASSOCIATION, Respondent. / 16 17 SECOND ORDER POSTPONING ENFORCEMENT OF LABOR ARBITRATION SUBPOENA Petitioner International Longshore and Warehouse Union brought this action to enforce a 18 labor arbitration subpoena issued by Coast Arbitrator John Kagel. On December 8, 2011, the 19 parties appeared for a hearing on the petition to enforce the labor arbitration subpoena. At that 20 time, the undersigned judge stated that a ruling on the petition to enforce the arbitration subpoena 21 would be postponed until the arbitrator ruled on respondent’s objections. Respondent was given 22 two weeks to move the arbitrator to rule on the objections and was ordered to produce the 23 documents to which no objections were raised by noon on December 12. A further hearing was 24 set for 8:00 a.m. on December 22. 25 Respondent filed a notice on December 9 stating that on December 8 it had requested that 26 the arbitrator rule on the objections to the subpoena at issue. The notice also indicated that the 27 arbitrator set a hearing on the objections for December 16. On December 12, respondent filed a 28 second notice stating that it had “produced written responses and documents to the Internal 1 Longshore Workers Union [sic], with regard to categories of request to which there were no 2 objections, in response to the subpoena issued on September 14, 2011” (Dkt. No. 27 at 2). 3 Last night, petitioner filed a notice indicating that it had withdrawn and modified the 4 requests to which respondent objected, and as a result, the parties agreed that respondent’s 5 objections were moot (Dkt. No. 28 at 2). At the hearing today, the parties informed the Court that 6 they did not appear before the arbitrator on December 16, as had been scheduled, because they 7 had reached an agreement that the objections were moot. Still, petitioner requested that the 8 undersigned confirm and enforce the arbitration subpoena. 9 This Court will not enforce the arbitration subpoena absent a ruling by the arbitrator on the subpoena he issued. Petitioner must go to the arbitrator and request a ruling from him. If 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 petitioner believes respondent has not produced all of the requested documents, then petitioner 12 must also raise that issue with the arbitrator. Then, once the arbitrator makes a ruling, the 13 undersigned will enforce it, having the benefit of the ruling of the arbitrator who issued the 14 subpoena and is familiar with the facts at issue. 15 A further hearing is set for 3:00 P.M. ON JANUARY 26, 2012. Petitioner must go to the 16 arbitrator and obtain a ruling on the arbitration subpoena prior to the hearing date. The petitioner 17 shall file a copy of the ruling with the court no later than NOON ON JANUARY 25. 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: December 22, 2011. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?