Case law

Cottman v. United States

20 C.C.P.A. 344 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 19, 1932

This governmental agency was given civil status and had a director general and a board of directors, on which board, among others, were representatives of the Cherifien Government. … In United States v. Int.

Morris Rosenbloom & Co. v. United States

17 C.C.P.A. 45 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 2, 1929

United States v. American Metal Co., 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 440 . In Linen Thread Co. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 301 , T. … In Schrikker v.

Application of Walter M. Budde, Jr

319 F.2d 242 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 20, 1963

C., and Alton V. Oberholtzer, Minneapolis, Minn., for appellant. Clarence W. Moore, Washington, D. C. (Jack E. Armore, Washington, D. C., of counsel), for the Commissioner of Patents. … I would therefore reverse the board's decision.

United States v. Spanish River Pulp & Paper Mills (Ltd.)

5 Ct. Cust. 235 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 28, 1914

At the hearing before the board Mr. … In the case of Cliff Paper Co. v.

Application of Herbert Muth

373 F.2d 744 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 9, 1967

In affirming the examiner, the board adopted his position as its own. … See Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17-18 , 86 S.Ct. 684 , 15 L.Ed.2d 545 .

Johnson v. United States

17 C.C.P.A. 107 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 11, 1929

Richard England (Ltd.), Brown Street, Salford. Messrs. Jackson & Brother (Ltd.), Wharf Foundry, Bolton. With reference to export value, James F. … Meadows, Wye & Co., Inc., et al. v. United States, 17 C. C. P. A. 36, T. D. 43324.

Stegemann v. United States

4 Ct. Cust. 5 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 12, 1913

Garrison v. United States ( 121 Fed., 149 ); United States v. Beierle ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 457 -461; T. D. 31506); Robertson v. Rosenthal ( 132 U. S., 460 -464). … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

United States v. Frederick Pustet Co.

17 C.C.P.A. 221 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 28, 1929

Bradford v. American Lithographic Co., 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 318, 323 ; United States v. Martorelli, 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 327, 331 . … Evidence was introduced before the Board of General Appraisers on the issue whether the goods were capable of being marked, and upon wjtdch the board held that the importer had not proved the rolls could not be marked.

Hamrah Bros. v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 147 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 21, 1921

—American Bead Co. v. United States ( 7 Ct. Cust. Appls., 161 T. D. 36465). … —United States v. Shallus ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 332 ; T. D. 32074), Madeira Embroidery Co. v. United States ( 9 Ct. Cust. Appls., 140 ; T. D. 37990).

In re Wittry

489 F.2d 1299 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 10, 1974

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals affirming the rejection of claims 1-4, 6-13 and 15-28, all the remaining claims in appellant’s application serial No. 862,985, filed August 19, 1969 for reissue of … Duncumb and V. E. Cosslett, from X-Kay Microscopy and Micro-radiography, edited by V. E. Cosslett et al., Academic Press, Inc., New York, 1957, pp. 374-380. .

Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States

32 C.C.P.A. 190 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 6, 1945

Clearly the vessel Caracas at the time the oil was received on board was not actually engaged in any such undertaking. … to be transported to South America; that she returned to New Orleans where more cargo was taken on board; that she then proceeded to South American ports where the cargo was discharged; that cargo was then taken on board

Crosse & Blackwell Co. v. United States

36 C.C.P.A. 33 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 2, 1948

Chew Hing Lung v. Wise, 176 U. S. 156 ; Neuman & Schwiers Co. et al. v. United States, 4 Ct. Cust. Appls. 64 , T. D. 33310; Brown & Co. v. United States, 6 Ct. Cust. Appls. 415 , T. D. 35977; Mawer Co. v. … See Neuman & Schwiers Co. et al. v. United States, supra; Brown & Co. v. United States, supra.

United States v. Witte Cutlery Co.

7 Ct. Cust. 181 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 6, 1916

United States v. Auto Import Co. ( 168 Fed., 242 ); Park & Tilford v. United States ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 34, 35 ; T. D. 31006); Isaacs v. Jonas ( 148 U. S., 648 ). … See United States v. Schoverling ( 146 U. S., 76 ); Isaacs v. Jonas, supra.

Beacon-Morris Corp. v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp.

463 F.2d 1097 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 17, 1972

I concur in the result reached by the majority, and especially agree with the board that: * * * The third-party registrations are of little value in determining the question of likelihood of confusion since we must decide … this issue on the marks of the parties as considered in their entireties regardless of the use by others of various components thereof. * * * Cf. dissenting opinion in Sterling Drug Inc. v.

Witcombe v. United States

3 Ct. Cust. 240 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 17, 1912

It was held in United States v. Rusch & Co. (167 Fed. … The Board of General Appraisers upheld this contention.

Louise & Co. v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 41 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 15, 1921

The Board of General Appraisers overruled the protests and the importers appealed. … The case of Max Grab Fashion Co. et al. v. United States ( 10 Ct. Cust. Appls., 39 ; T. D. 38262), cited by the Government, is not in *45 point.

Lindsley Bros. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 138 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 3, 1924

Martin, Presiding Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: This is an appeal from a so-called re-reappraisement of imported merchandise made by a board of three general appraisers in proceedings begun under the tariff act … The issue is identical in principle with that decided concurrently herewith by this court in the case of Scaramelli v. United States ( 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 134 ; T. D. 40056).

Bayersdorfer v. United States

4 Ct. Cust. 446 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 11, 1913

The importers protested and, decision having been rendered against them by the Board of General Appraisers, appealed to this court. … United States v. Bayersdorfer ( 175 Fed., 959 ). Affirmed.

Charles T. Wilson Co. v. United States

28 C.C.P.A. 63 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 29, 1940

Nevertheless, this court, following the declaration of the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals in Shallus v. United States, 18 C. C. P. A. 332, T. D. 44585, and United States v. Enbun, 19 C. C. P. A. 79, T. … In this form ginger presents a brown, more or less irregularly wrinkled or striated surface, and when broken shows a dark brownish fracture, hard, and sometimes horny and resinous.

Stone v. United States

21 C.C.P.A. 479 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 12, 1934

Savory, chairman of the board of directors, or Mr. … Johnson Co. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 373 , T.D. 41318; United States v. Tadross & Co. et al., 14 Ct. Cust. Appls. 10 , T.D. 41528; Happel & McAvoy, Inc. v. United States, 16 Ct. Cust.