by the application of another federal statute if it is possible to give effect to both laws.” Id. Taking into consideration the concerns expressed by the Seventh Circuit in Palumbo, the Court finds that application of the Garmon preemption should remain consistent with that previously established by the district courts in this circuit, but with one slight modification. The Garmon doctrine preempts other federal statutes when the underlying conduct is actionable only by virtue of the NLRA. Therefore, the Court must first determine the type of conflict at issue because the intersection of two federal statutes involves an analysis distinct from the traditional Garmon preemption. If the conflict is between state regulation and the NLRA, then obvi eamsters, 948 F.2d 98 (2d Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); Britt v. Grocers Supply Co., Inc. 978 F.2d
holding that this court has authority in appropriate circumstances to issue writs under all writs act 28 usc  1651a holding that the all writs act does not provide an independent basis for supplemental federal jurisdiction in situations where federal jurisdiction is otherwise wholly lacking recognizing the all writs act gives federal courts authority to issue writs of coram nobis to correct fundamental errors in criminal proceedings where the person is no longer in custody holding that removal to federal court was proper for claims asserted under all writs act holding that district court had jurisdiction to consider claims under the all writs act