Following an Oct. 23 inconclusive decision by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in the case involving a ruling by a federal district court to enjoin the failed UTU/SMWIA merger, a petition was filed for rehearing by the panel or by all 15 judges of the Sixth Circuit.

The petition was filed by the plaintiffs -- whose initial complaint in 2007 led to a restraining order against the UTU/SMWIA merger -- as well as by the UTU.

Two of the three judges on the panel who ruled Oct. 23 found that the federal district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing the preliminary injunction against the merger. 

Further, two of the three members of the appellate court panel found the district court did have jurisdiction, but the alignment of the judges on these issues produced an inconclusive result. 

In fact, one of the three appellate judges involved in the Oct. 23 inconclusive ruling recommended that, "in light of the competing rationales and potential for confusion, the panel might have been better advised to have permitted this appeal to be reassigned to another panel, in lieu of deciding it, in the hope that another panel might have been capable of producing a two-judge majority."

In asking for the rehearing, the plaintiffs cite an "exceptional public importance concerning the jurisdiction of the federal courts to hear claims by union members under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act."

Members signed up for e-mail alerts will receive notice of new developments immediately as they occur. To sign up for e-mail alerts, visit the UTU home page at www.utu.org and click on the "e-mail alerts" link.

To read the 15-page petition for rehearing, click here.

To read the 58-page Oct. 23 inconclusive decision of the Sixth Circuit's three-judge panel, click here.