Case Name: DESIGN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing and DTG California Management, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing, Petitioners v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. Vanessa Morris, Intervenor
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-03-15
Citations: 688 F. App'x 3
Docket Number: No. 14-1232 Consolidated with 14-1303
Parties: DESIGN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing and DTG California Management, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing, Petitioners v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent Vanessa Morris, Intervenor
Judges: Before: Henderson and Tatel, Circuit Judges, and Randolph, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 688
Pages: 3–4

Head Matter:
DESIGN TECHNOLOGY GROUP, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing and DTG California Management, LLC, doing business as Bettie Page Clothing, Petitioners v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent Vanessa Morris, Intervenor
No. 14-1232 Consolidated with 14-1303
September Term, 2016
United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Filed on: March 15, 2017
David Richard Koch, Koch & Scow LLC, Henderson, NV, for Petitioners
Ruth E. Burdick, Deputy Assistant General Counsel, Linda Dreeben, Deputy Associate General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Kellie J. Isbell, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, (NLRB) Appellate and Supreme Court Litigation Branch, Washington, DC, for Respondent
David A. Rosenfeld, Weinberg Roger & Rosenfeld, Alameda, CA, for Intervenor for Respondent
Elizabeth Ann Gaudio, National Federation of Independent Business, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae for Petitioner '
Before: Henderson and Tatel, Circuit Judges, and Randolph, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
Per Curiam
These cases were considered on the record from the National Labor Relations Board and the briefs and supplemental briefs of the parties. The court has afforded the issues full consideration and has determined they do not warrant a published opinion. See Fed. R. App. P. 36; D.C. Cir. R. 36(d). Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the cases are remanded for reconsideration of the remedy in light of changed circumstances.
The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. R. 41(b).