The opinion
PER CURIAM:
The Union petitioner requests the court to set aside, and the Board by cross-petition requests the court to enforce, a Board Order based on findings that the Union had violated the “secondary boycott provisions of the Labor Act, Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B). We have considered the Union’s Contentions, largely based on its view of Local 761, etc., Electrical Workers v. National Labor Relations Board, 366 U.S. 667 , 81 S.Ct. 1285 , 6 L.Ed.2d 592 , that “the ‘reserve gate’ doctrine is limited to the particular facts of that case, and cannot be applied to invalidate picketing at a common construction site.” We conclude, however, that the record considered as a whole gives substantial evidentiary support to the findings of the Board that the Union engaged in conduct prohibited by the provisions of the Act above referred to, and that the case cited'is no bar to the Order based on the findings.
The petition of the Union accordingly is denied, and the Order of the Board will be enforced.
It is so ordered.