Federal Judiciary

COOK, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Sharyn Gruener appeals from a jury verdict rendered for her former employer, Defendant The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, in this Americans with Disabilities Act (?ADA?) action. Gruener seeks reversal on two grounds. She contends the trial court erred by (1) denying her requested jury instruction on the ADA?s regarded-as-disabled definition of disability, and (2) denying her motion for a new trial as the clear weight of the evidence belied the verdict. Because Gruener failed to present evidence warranting a regarded-as-disabled instruction and because she failed to amend her notice of appeal to include the trial court?s order denying her motion for a new trial, we affirm.

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Petitioner-appellant Stephen Michael Bell was convicted in Tennessee state court of one count of first degree murder and one count of second degree murder. After unsuccessfully pursuing relief in the Tennessee appellate courts, Bell sought a writ of habeas corpus in federal district court. The district court denied Bell?s petition but issued a certificate of appealability as to Bell?s claims that the prosecution in his case violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), by failing to turn over impeachment material and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Bell appealed, and a divided panel of our court reversed the district court as to Bell?s Brady claim. Bell v. Bell, 460 F.3d 739 (6th Cir. 2006). A majority of the active members of the court voted for rehearing en banc, vacating the original panel decision. For the reasons below, we affirm the decision of the district court denying Bell habeas relief.

ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Truck Drivers Local No. 164 (?Union?) appeals from the district court?s grant of summary judgment in favor of Allied Waste Systems, Inc. (?Allied?), which vacated an arbitrator?s award ordering reinstatement of Grievant Keith Miller (?Miller?). On appeal, the Union argues that the district court erred in vacating the arbitrator?s award. At oral argument, both parties agreed that this case is directly impacted by our recent en banc decision in Michigan Family Resources, Inc. v. Service Employees International Union, 475 F.3d 746, 752-53 (6th Cir. 2007), which held that courts are without authority to overturn an arbitrator?s award so long as the arbitrator was ?arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority.? Id. After carefully reviewing the arbitrator?s decision and the parties? arguments, we find that the arbitrator was faithfully attempting to construe and apply the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, that the arbitrator was acting within the scope of his authority, and that the district court lacked legal authority upon which to vacate the arbitrator?s award. We accordingly REVERSE the district court?s decision and REMAND with instructions to reinstate the arbitrator?s award and for further proceedings consistent with this opinion in regard to the Union?s demand for additional back pay.