Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-60588/USCOURTS-ca5-15-60588-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Katch Kan USA, L.L.C.
Petitioner Cross-Respondent
National Labor Relations Board
Respondent Cross-Petitioner

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-60588

KATCH KAN USA, L.L.C.

Petitioner/Cross-Respondent, 

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

Respondent/Cross-Petitioner.

On Petition for Review and Cross-Application

for Enforcement of an Order of the

National Labor Relations Board

NLRB No. 16-CA-134743

Before KING, SMITH, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Katch Kan USA, L.L.C. seeks review of a National Labor Relations 

Board order finding that it engaged in an unfair labor practice when it fired 

Tanner Siems. Katch Kan maintains that it terminated Siems because he 

refused an assignment to Saudi Arabia. The Board, however, adopted the 

finding of an administrative law judge who concluded that the termination was 

retaliation for Siems’s engaging in protected activity just eleven days before he 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 30, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-60588 Document: 00513658174 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/30/2016
No. 15-60588

2

was fired. The protected activity involved participation in a work stoppage 

that protested a significant change in Katch Kan’s compensation system.

The standard of review decides the outcome of this appeal. We must 

enforce the Board’s order so long as it is supported by substantial evidence, 

which we have described as evidence that is “relevant and sufficient for a 

reasonable mind to accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” El Paso Elec. 

Co. v. N.L.R.B., 681 F.3d 651, 656–57 (5th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks 

and citation omitted). Having reviewed the record, briefs, and arguments of 

counsel, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s order. 

Katch Kan’s petition is DENIED. The Board’s order is ENFORCED.

 Case: 15-60588 Document: 00513658174 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/30/2016