Case law

United States v. Prosser

1 Ct. Cust. 22 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 25, 1910

The Board of Appraisers sustained the importer’s contention,- and from the decision of the board, the United States prosecutes this appeal. … See also United States v. Meier (136 Fed. Rep., 764). The court of appeals, in affirming Newman v. United States (159 Fed.

Bramley v. Beese

132 F.2d 1001 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 26, 1942

In this case, we are in much the same position as we were in Brand v. Thomas, 96 F.2d 301, 303 , 25 C. … The decision of the Board of Interference Examiners is affirmed. Affirmed.

Application of David Bandel

348 F.2d 563 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 12, 1965

The board regarded the examiner as having rejected the claims for two separate reasons. … It considered the decision of the District Court in the first interference, American Machine & Foundry Company v.

Winkelmann v. Calvert

154 F.2d 1012 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 4, 1946

Appellant in his reasons of appeal alleges that the Board of Interference Examiners erred in holding that the decision in Calvert v. … The decision of the Board of Interference Examiners is accordingly affirmed. Affirmed.

Gamble v. Church

57 F.2d 761 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 2, 1932

Pengilly v. Copeland, 17 C. C. P. A. … Sundberg v. Schmitt, 58 App. D. C. 292; Vanore v. Improta, 25 F. (2d) 918.

In re Fischer

62 F.2d 96 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 19, 1932

Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 11 How. 248, 265 ; Hicks v. Kelsey, 18 Wall. 670 ; Florsheim v. Schilling, 137 U. S. 64, 76 ; Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co., 93 U. S. 486 ; In re Lobdell, 56 App. D. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

United States v. Amerman & Patterson

9 Ct. Cust. 244 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 25, 1919

The protest was sustained by the Board of General Appraisers and the Government appeals from this decision. … Kahlen v. United States ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 206, 208 ; T. D. 31947).

In re Lewis

129 F.2d 560 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 15, 1942

Reckendorfer v. Faber, 92 U. S. 347 ; Grimmell Washing Machine Co. v. Johnson Co., 247 U. S. 426 ; Hailes v. Van Wormer, 20 Wall. 353 ; In re Hueber & Horton, 21 C. C. P. A. … (Patents) 1423, 104 F. (2d) 824; Sachs et al. v. Hartford Electric Supply Co., 47 F. (2d) 743.

Bradford Co. v. American Lithographic Co.

12 Ct. Cust. 318 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 28, 1924

—Junge v. Hedden ( 146 U. S. 233 ). … We conclude, therefore, that the protests in this case properly invoked the jurisdiction of the Board of General Appraisers. The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed. Barber, Judge, dissents.

Ishimitsu v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 186 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 14, 1921

The Board of General Appraisers overruled the protest upon the authority of T. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.

Application of Ruben O. Peterson (Deceased) (The Osborn Manufacturing Company, Assignee, Substituted)

274 F.2d 672 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 19, 1960

Each row contains a suitable number of “V-shaped” strips, the bottom thereof being used for retention of the strip on the drum. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is reversed. Reversed.

In Re La Montagne

55 F.2d 486 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 1, 1932

A.) 220 F. 899 ; Weisgerber v. Clowney (C. C.) 131 F. 477, 480 ; Boyle v. Rousso (C. C. A.) 16 F.(2d) 666 ; Ex parte Koehring, 37 F.(2d) 421 , 17 C. C. P. A. 774; Franklin Knitting Mills v. Gropper Knitting Mills (C. C. … The decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office is therefore affirmed in appeals Nos. 2856, 2857, 2858, 2859, 2860, and 2861. Affirmed.

Louis H. Segall v. Marion W. Sims, Ezra C. Hill and Aaron M. Krakower

276 F.2d 661 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 3, 1960

In re Hollman, 213 F.2d 323 , 41 CCPA 937; Crome v. Morrogh, 239 F.2d 390 , 44 CCPA 704. … Long v. Young, 159 F.2d 766 , 34 CCPA 871; In re Hollman, supra. Sims et al. disclose, without limitation, a source of unidirectional capacitor charging current.

Dow Co. v. United States

7 Ct. Cust. 343 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 21, 1916

District of Columbia v. Hutton ( 143 U. S., 18, 26-27 ). … Kent v. United States ( 73 Fed., 680 ); United States v. Ranlett ( 172 U. S., 133, 140-141 ); District of Columbia v. Hutton ( 143 U. S., 18, 26-27 ). The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.

United States v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.

20 C.C.P.A. 267 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 5, 1932

We held in United States v. Frankel Importing Co., 18 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 188, T. … United States v. The Halle Bros. Co., 20 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 281, T. D. 46077, decided concurrently herewith.

United States v. Saunders

6 Ct. Cust. 86 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 14, 1915

See also United States v. Morris European & American Express Co. ( 3 Ct. Cust. Appls., 146 ; T. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed

In re Mason

94 F.2d 220 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 7, 1938

Braren v. Horner, 18 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 971, 47 F. (2d) 358; In re Beplate et al., 22 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1232, 77 F. (2d) 506. … Hall v. Shimadzu, 19 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1288, 59 F. (2d) 225.

S. Schwabacher & Co. v. United States

22 C.C.P.A. 496 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 7, 1935

The First Division of the United States Customs Court, Brown, J., dissenting, overruled the protests and sustained the action of the Collector of Customs. … Frank & Co. v. United States, 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 273, 277, 279 . United States v. Yuen, 11 Ct. Cust. Appls. 479 . United States v. Lamport Export Co., 15 Ct. Cust. Appls. 394, 401 . United States v. Calumbo Co., 21 C.

Glickman v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 151 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 21, 1921

In this respect we are not able to distinguish between the facts here and in the case of Louise v. United States ( 11 Ct. Cust. Appls., 41 ; T. … The record shows that only one member of the board that decided this case heard the witnesses. The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Gleason v. Dosch

39 F.2d 687 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 14, 1930

A. 718; Smith v. Nichols, 21 Wall. 112, 119 ; O’Reilly v. Morse, 15 How. 61, 123 . … The decision, of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.