Local Union 342 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada v. R E Milano Plumbing Corporation

facts, the arguments made by both parties, and the applicable legal standards. There is no basis for vacating the joint conference board (JCB) award. See Sprewell v. Golden State Warriors, 266 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2001). Milano argues that the JCB exceeded the scope of its authority by failing to continue the hearing. But the JCB concluded that Milano had not requested a continuance. Dkt. No. 23-8 at 2. And the JCB’s conclusions are entitled to a great amount of deference, especially its findings of fact. See Stead Motors of Walnut Creek v. Automotive Machinists Lodge No. 1173, 886 F.2d 1200, 1202–10 (9th Cir. 1989). Even looking at the underlying record, the JCB’s conclusion that Milano never requested a continuance is reasonable. After Milano’s owner was informed about a hearing date of April 25, he responded only that he was not personally available until September. He did not explain why he was unavailable, offer an alternative date, offer to send a representative, or otherwise engage in the scheduling process. His only other communication was on the morning of the hearing, when he declined the meeting invite and said that he could not attend. A representative for Milano was…