LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.

P R E L I M I N A R Y P R I N T
Volume 596 U. S. Part 1
Page 242
OFFICIAL REPORTS
OF
T H E S U P R E M E C O U R T
April 28, 2022
REBECCA A. WOMELDORF
reporter of decisions
Page Proof Pending Publication
N O T I C E : This preliminary print is subject to formal revision before
the bound volume is published. Users are requested to notify the Reporter
of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D.C. 20543,
pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors.

242 OCTOBER
TERM, 2021
Per Curiam
LeDURE v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CO.
certiorari
to the united states court of appeals for
the seventh circuit
No. 20–807. Argued March 28, 2022—Decided April 28, 2022
962 F. 3d 907, affrmed by an equally divided Court.
David C. Frederick argued the cause for petitioner. With
him on the briefs were Bradley E. Oppenheimer, Nelson G.
Wolff, and Jerome J. Schlichter.
Colleen E. Roh Sinzdak argued the cause for the United
States as amicus curiae supporting petitioner. With her on
the brief were Solicitor General Prelogar, Acting Assistant
At t o r ney Gene ra l Bo yn t o n, De pu ty So l i ci t o r Gene ral
Kneedler, Daniel Tenny, Joshua M. Koppel, Paul M. Geier,
Paula Lee, and Rebecca S. Behravesh.
J. Scott Ballenger argued the cause for respondent. With
him on the brief were Tyce R. Walters, J. Timothy Eaton,
and Jonathan B. Amarilio.*
Per Curiam.
The judgment is affrmed by an equally divided Court.
Justice Barrett took no part in the consideration or de-
cision of this case.
*Lawrence M. Mann, Kevin Brodar, and Joseph M. Sayler fled a brief
for the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers-Transportation
Division et al. as amici curiae urging reversal.
Briefs of amici curiae urging affrmance were fled for the Association
of American Railroads by Daniel Saphire and Joseph G. St. Peter; and for
the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America et al. by Carter
G. Phillips, Tobias S. Loss-Eaton, and Andrew R. Varcoe.
Page Proof Pending Publication

Page Proof Pending Publication
Reporter’s Note
The attached opinion has been revised to refect the usual publication
and citation style of the United States Reports. The revised pagination
makes available the offcial United States Reports citation in advance of
publication. The syllabus has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions
for the convenience of the reader and constitutes no part of the opinion of
the Court. A list of counsel who argued or fled briefs in this case, and
who were members of the bar of this Court at the time this case was
argued, has been inserted following the syllabus. Other revisions may
include adjustments to formatting, captions, citation form, and any errant
punctuation. The following additional edits were made:
None