July 29 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Monday

signaled that a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling curbing the

in-house enforcement powers of some federal agencies could

impact the National Labor Relations Board, in a case involving

alleged labor law violations by Macy's.

A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S.

Circuit asked lawyers for the board, Macy's, and a union

representing the retailer's employees to file briefs explaining

how the Supreme Court's June ruling in Jarkesy v. U.S.

Securities and Exchange Commission may affect the NLRB's ability

to impose remedies in administrative cases.

Macy's is appealing an NLRB decision that said it unlawfully

locked out a group of building engineers in 2020 after they

ended a strike over stalled union contract negotiations, and

required the company to post notices informing workers of their

rights.

The International Union of Operating Engineers affiliate

that represents those workers filed a cross-appeal arguing that

the board did not go far enough in imposing remedies on Macy's.

The 9th Circuit heard oral arguments in the case in March.

Macy's and lawyers for the union did not immediately respond

to requests for comment. An NLRB spokeswoman declined to

comment.

The Supreme Court in its Jarkesy ruling said the SEC's

practice of imposing monetary penalties for financial fraud in

administrative cases violates defendants' constitutional right

to a jury trial.

The decision only directly impacts the SEC, but is widely

expected to lead courts to block other agencies from handing

down penalties in administrative cases.

Federal labor law only allows the NLRB to impose remedies

that make workers subjected to unlawful conduct whole and does

not allow for statutory penalties, but the board in recent years

has attempted to expand them.

In a 2022 decision in the case Thryv Inc, the board said it

would begin ordering employers to reimburse workers for

pecuniary harms tied directly to unlawful labor practices, such

as out-of-pocket medical expenses and credit card fees incurred

by workers as a result of being illegally fired.

The New Orleans-based 5th Circuit in May threw out the Thryv

ruling, but it did so on the merits of the board's decision and

did not address the broader issue of remedies.

The 5th Circuit ruling does not bind the 9th Circuit, which

in Monday's two-sentence order asked for briefs on Jarkesy's

impact "on the award of remedies under the National Labor

Relations Board's decision in Thryv Inc."

The panel includes 9th Circuit Judges Jacqueline Nguyen and

Patrick Bumatay and Federal Circuit Judge Evan Wallach, who is

sitting by designation.

The case is Macy's Inc v. NLRB, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of

Appeals, No. 23-150.

For the NLRB: Barbara Sheehy

For the union: David Rosenfeld of Weinberg, Roger &

Rosenfeld

For Macy's: Laura Ann Pierson-Scheinberg of Jackson Lewis

Read more:

NLRB ruling that expanded money damages for workers rejected

by 5th Circuit

SEC in-house judges violate right to jury trial, appeals

court rules

US Supreme Court faults SEC's use of in-house judges in

latest curbs on agency powers

NLRB GC directs staff to seek expansive remedies for workers

Workers entitled to more money from employers who break the

law - labor board

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York)