Case law

Salomon v. United States

2 Ct. Cust. 92 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 22, 1911

Two cases were subsequently decided by the Board of General Appraisers prior to the enactment of the statute of 1909. In Doggett v. United States (T. … See Shallus v. United States ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 556 ; T. D. 31552) and cases cited; United States v. Myers ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 257 ; T. D. 31301); Komada v. United States ( 215 U. S., 392 ).

Briggs v. United States

1 Ct. Cust. 408 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 3, 1911

Hilton v. Merritt ( 110 U. S., 97, 107 ); Auffmordt v. Hedden ( 137 U. S., 310, 325 ). … United States v. Passavant ( 169 U. S., 16, 19 ); United States v. Klingenberg ( 153 U. S., 93, 101, 104 ); Badger v. Cusimano ( 130 U. S., 39, 43 ); Hilton v. Merritt ( 110 U. S., 97, 106 ); Robertson v. Frank ( 132 U.

Stevenson v. International Trade Commission

612 F.2d 546 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 20, 1979

See United States v. … Graham v.

United States v. Monsanto Chemical Works

21 C.C.P.A. 33 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 12, 1933

Every such application shall be assigned by the Board of. … Malony v. Adsit, supra; Metropolitan Railroad Co. v. District of Columbia, 195 U. S. 322, 330 ; McCuing v. Bovay, 60 F. (2d) 375, 376; compare Christy v. Pridgeon, 4 Wall. 196, 201, 202 .

United States v. Kurtz, Stuböeck & Co.

5 Ct. Cust. 144 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 5, 1914

Sec. 14, act of 1909; McGoon v. Scales ( 9 Wall., 23, 30 ). … Brignardello ( 1 Wall., 627, 634 ); Voorhees v. United States Bank ( 10 Pet., 449 , 473). The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.

Toro Co. v. Hardigg Industries, Inc.

549 F.2d 785 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 3, 1977

In Knickerbocker Toy Co., Inc. v. Faultless Starch Co., 467 F.2d 501 , 59 CCPA 1300 (1972), citing Gillespie v. … Burrell & Co. v.

Scharf Bros. v. United States

16 Ct. Cust. 347 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 19, 1928

In United States v. Wecker & Co., 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 220 , T. … In Irvin Massin & Bros., supra, and United States v.

In re Nantucket Inc.

677 F.2d 95 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 6, 1982

In World Carpets, Inc. v. … In National Lead Co. v.

May Co. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 266 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 9, 1924

Kohne v. Insurance Co. ( 1 Wash. C. C. 138 , 165); United States v. … —Brown & Co. et al. v. United States ( 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 207 ; T. D. 40026); Scaramelli v. United States ( 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 134 ; T. D. 40056); Keve & Young v. United States ( 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 103 ; T.

Contour Chair-Lounge Co., Inc. v. The Englander Company, Inc.

324 F.2d 186 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 17, 1964

Daltroff & Cie v. V. Vivaudou, Inc., 53 F.2d 536 , 19 CCPA 715, 717; Skelly Oil Co. v. The Powerine Co., 86 F.2d 752 , 24 CCPA 790, 792; Coty, Inc. v. … Perfumes Habana, S.A., 190 F.2d 91 , 38 CCPA 1180, 1185; Eureka Williams Corp. v. Willoughby Machine and Tool Co., 194 F.2d 543 , 39 CCPA 832, 833. To the same effect, see the board’s decision in The Julep Company v.

United States v. Emery

53 C.C.P.A. 1 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 13, 1966

The cases are: Hartranft v. Langfeld, 125 U.S. 128 (1888); Robertson v. Edelhoff, 132 U.S. 614 (1890); Cadwalader v. Wanamaker, 149 U.S. 532 (1893); Hartranft v. Meyer, 149 U.S. 544 (1893): and Walker v. … These cases are: Chrystal v. United States, 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 489 , T.D. 35148; United States v. Boker & Co., 6 Ct. Cust. Appls. 243 , T.D. 35472; Brown & Co. v. United States, 7 Ct. Cust.

Tuxedo Monopoly, Inc. v. General Mills Fun Group, Inc.

648 F.2d 1335 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 7, 1981

Feed Service Corp. v. FS Services, Inc., 58 CCPA 708, 432 F.2d 478 , 167 USPQ 407 (1970); Ford Motor Co. v. Ford, 59 CCPA 1124, 462 F.2d 1405 , 174 USPQ 456 (1972). … The Wella Corp. v. California Concept Corp., 558 F.2d 1019 , 194 USPQ 419 (CCPA 1977); Sheraton Corp. of America v. Sheffield Watch, Inc., 480 F.2d 1400 , 178 USPQ 468 (CCPA 1973); Norton Co. v. Bear Mfg.

Wolff v. United States

1 Ct. Cust. 181 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 11, 1911

Muser v. Magone ( 155 U. … United States v. Passavant ( 169 U. S., 16, 19 ); United States v. Klingenberg ( 153 U. S., 93, 101, 104 ); Badger v. Cusimano ( 130 U. S., 39,43 ); Hilton v. Merritt ( 110 U. S., 97, 106 ); Robertson v. Frank ( 132 U.

Lord v. United States

8 Ct. Cust. 345 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 13, 1918

Pending hearing upon this protest- the Board of General Appraisers in another case—see G. A. 7618 (T. D. 34858), decision in which was affirmed in this court in United States v. Sherman & Sons Co. et al. ( 6 Ct. Cust. … See also, in this connection, Cramer v. Arthur (12 Otto; 102 U. S., 612 ), Hoeninghaus v. United States ( 172 U. S., 622 ), Sampson et al. v. Peaslee ( 20 How., 61 U. S., 571), and Prosser v. United States ( 1 Ct. Cust.

Kuttroff v. United States

13 Ct. Cust. 17 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 20, 1925

.— Wolff v. … In United States v.

Knickerbocker Toy Co. v. Faultless Starch Co.

467 F.2d 501 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 12, 1972

Mazer v. … The Board also relied on Merrick v.

Tofe v. Winchell

645 F.2d 58 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 31, 1981

However, this Board views the decision in Thompson v. … Loshbough v. Allen, 54 CCPA 1113, 373 F.2d 747 , 152 USPQ 812 (1967). As a final matter, we endorse the procedure by the board indicated by the report of the proceedings in Steierman v.

National Hat Pin Co. v. United States

5 Ct. Cust. 435 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 27, 1914

In United States v. Lun Chong & Co. ( 3 Ct. Cust. Appls., 468 ; T. … United States v. Bennett ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 249 ; T.

United States v. Macy & Co.

13 Ct. Cust. 245 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 21, 1925

We have uniformly held that *249 the Board of General Appraisers is a judicial tribunal. United States v. Kurtz et al., 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 144 ; United States v. McConnaughey Co., 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 112 ; T. D. 40944. … Co. v. Kidd, 146 Fed. 499 ; Rathbone v. Rathbone, 4 Pick. 89 (92). The Board of General Appraisers construed the petition filed in this case as sufficient under Rule XXXVI.

Klein v. United States

13 Ct. Cust. 273 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 21, 1925

S. 38 ; Morrill v. Jones, 106 U. S. 466 ; United States v. Eaton, 144 U. S. 677 ; Steinmetz v. Allen, 192 U. S. 543 ; Williamson v. United States, 207 U. S. 425 ; Aktieselskabet Fide v. … Lloyd Braziliero, 283 Fed. 62 ; Maderia Embroidery Co. v. United States, 9 Ct. Cust. Appls. 141 ; United States v. Younglove Grocery Co., 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 377 .