National Labor Relations Board v. Fes, (A Division of Thermo Power)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that because “[t]he tenor of [the employer’s] challenge before the Board raised a purely factual question,” a related legal challenge was jurisdictionally barred
• holding that because “[t]he tenor of [the employer’s] challenge before the Board raised a purely factual question,” a related legal challenge was jurisdictionally barred
• holding that because the “tenor of FES’s challenge before the Board raised a purely factual question” and did not “providef] the basis for its challenge,” FES failed to raise the issue before the Board
• “[The plaintiff's] testimony ... amounts to an unsupported, conclusory assertion, which we have held is inadequate to satisfy the movant’s burden of proof on summary judgment.”
• “Roche’s testimony . . . amounts to an unsupported, conclusory assertion, which we have held is inadequate to satisfy the movant’s burden of proof on summary judgment.”
• “[The plaintiff’s] testimony. . . amounts to an unsupported, conclusory assertion, which we have held is inadequate to satisfy the movant’s burden of proof on summary judgment”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).