Case law

Ippolito v. Nancy Ann Dressed Dolls

184 F.2d 201 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Sep 29, 1950

184 F.2d 201 IPPOLITO v. NANCY ANN DRESSED DOLLS. Patent Appeal No. 5694. United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals. June 30, 1950. Rehearing Denied September 29, 1950. J. Calvin Brown, Los Angeles, Cal. … Co. v.

States v. States

22 C.C.P.A. 1 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 16, 1934

Citing Marshall Field v. United States, 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 191 , T.D. 34324; Friedlaender v. United States, T.D. 43393; Wanamaker v. United States, T.D. 44115; and Friedlaender v. … The Supreme Court, in United States v.

United States v. Foochow Importing Co.

18 C.C.P.A. 313 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 21, 1931

United States v. Lyon & Healy, 4 Ct. Cust. Appls. 84 , T. D. 33366; United States v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 7 Ct. Cust. Appls. 60 , T. D. 36388; United States v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 9 Ct. Cust. Appls. 33 , T. D. 37875. … United States v. Stone & Co., 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 233 , T. D. 41180; United States v. R. Hillier’s Son Co. (Inc.), 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 103 , T. D. 42762, and cases therein cited.

Solder Removal Co. v. United States International Trade Commission

582 F.2d 628 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 24, 1978

As was stated in Montgomery Ward & Co. v. … See, e.g., Globe Linings, Inc. v. City of Corvallis, supra note 9, at 729, 194 USPQ at 417; Eisele v. St. Amour, 423 F.2d 135, 138-139 , 165 USPQ 161, 164 (CA6 1970); Everest & Jennings, Inc. v.

United States v. Geo. S. Bush & Co.

29 C.C.P.A. 241 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 23, 1942

Ringk v. United States, 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 132 , T. D. 42769; United States v. Cohn & Rosenberger, Inc., 19 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 137, T. D. 45269; American Import Co. v. United States, 26 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 72, T. … Ringk v. United States, supra.

United States v. Rietmann Pilcer Co.

24 C.C.P.A. 371 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 25, 1937

It appears from the decision in the Greenleaf v. … Upon that question the decision in Greenleaf v.

United States v. Astra Bentwood Furniture Co.

28 C.C.P.A. 205 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 28, 1940

In support of that contention, counsel rely upon the decision of this court in the case of Stein, Hall & Co. v. United States, 11 Ct. Cust. Appls. 137 , T. D. 38938. … In the case of Stein, Hall & Co. v.

Textile Design Co. v. United States

30 C.C.P.A. 191 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 1, 1943

Solomon v. United States, 54 Treas. … In the case of United States v. Henry Maier, 21 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 41, T.

Werner G. Smith Co. v. United States

40 C.C.P.A. 90 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 17, 1952

American Smelting & Refining Co. v. United States, 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 212 , T. D. 40226; American Smelting & Refining Co. v. United States, 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 46 , T. D. 42718. See also United States v. … White v. Winchester Club, 315 U. S. 32 ; United States v. Raynor, 302 U. S. 540 .

United States v. International Expediters, Inc.

40 C.C.P.A. 148 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 14, 1953

United States v. Semon Bache & Co., 25 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 387, T. D. 49466; United States v. Mexican Products Co., 28 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 80, C. A. D. 129; and Jenkins et al. v. United States, 34 C. C. P. A. … United States v. Dunhill, 12 Cust. Ct. 407 , R. D. 5791.

Wilbur-Ellis Co. v. United States

18 C.C.P.A. 472 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 25, 1931

In the case of Train et al. v. … After reciting specific uses other than for making paper, the court said: In these circumstances I concur in the opinion of the Board of General Appraisers that the practical uses of the goods for purposes of manufacture,

Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp.

673 F.2d 1254 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 11, 1982

Asso. of Black Lawyers v. N.C. Board of Law Ex aminers, 538 F. 2d 547, 548-49 (CA 4 1976), Zenith argues that the subject discovery order is interlocutory and thus not appealable as a matter of right. … Co. v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149 (1908) ; Cameron v. Hodges, 127 U.S. 322 (1888) ; Mansfield, C. & L.M. Ry v.

P. Silverman & Son v. United States

32 C.C.P.A. 99 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 11, 1944

Silverman & Son v. United States, 27 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 324, C. A. D. 107. … Reliance is placed upon our statement in United States v. Basket Importing Co., 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 98 , T.

American Express Co. v. United States

472 F.2d 1050 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 8, 1973

See Imbert Imports, Inc. v. United States, 65 Cust. Ct. 697 , R.D. 11718 (1970), aff’d, 67 Cust. Ct. 569 , A.R.D. 294 (1971), now on appeal to this court (Customs Appeal No. 5483), and The Hoenig Plywood Corp. v. … Re Drawback on Italian Machine Parts: PEG Commission v. Italy, reported at 5 Com. Mkt. L.R. 97 (1966).

Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. United States

31 C.C.P.A. 56 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 6, 1943

In the briefs on behalf of both parties the case of Gallagher & Asher et al. v. United States, 6 Ct. Cust. Appls. 105 , T. D. 35343, 28 Treas. … We there affirmed the judgment of the Board of General Appraisers (now the United States Customs Court) sustaining the collector’s classification, and, in the course of our decision, construed the language involved so far

United States v. Mexican Petroleum Corp.

28 C.C.P.A. 90 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 29, 1940

In the cases of Bradley Martin, Jr., v. United States, 3 Ct. Cust. Appls. 384 , T. D. 32982; United States v. Tsai, 9 id. 42, T. D. 37902; United States v. Bird, 16 id. 306, T. D. 42876; Hinkle v. United States, 19 C. … As we said in the case of Hinkle v.

Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States

20 C.C.P.A. 27 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 2, 1932

Hampton & Co. v. United States, 276 U. S. 394 ; Union Bridge Co. v. United States, 204 U. S. 364 ; William A. Foster & Co. (Inc.) et al. v. *35 United States, Suit 3458, 20 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 15, T. … In Londoner v. Denver, 210 U.

In Re Orion Co.

71 F.2d 458 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 23, 1934

Lehnbeuter v. Holthaus, 105 U. S. 94, 96 [ 26 L. Ed. 939 ] ; Fenton Co. v. Office Spec. Co., 12 App. D. C. 201, 216; Consol. Con. Co. v. Hassam Pav. Co. [C. C. A.] 227 F. 436 ; R. R. Sup. Co. v. Hart Steel Co. [C. C. … Federal Trade Comm’n v. Royal Milling Co., 288 U. S. 212, 216 , 53 S. Ct. 335 , 77 L. Ed. 706 ; Carlsbad v. W. T. Thackeray & Co. (C. C.) 57 F. 18 .

Foster v. United States

20 C.C.P.A. 15 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 2, 1932

Norwegian Nitrogen *23 Products Co. v. United States, 20 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 27, T. D. 45674; United States v. Fox River Butter Co., 20 C. C. P. A. (Customs) —, T. D. 45675. … (Inc.) v. United States Tariff Commission, 274 U.

United States v. Petow

34 C.C.P.A. 55 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 4, 1946

It is true, as often has been stated (decisions in point being the cases of Bache & Co. v. United States, 11 Ct. Cust. Appls. 314, T. D. 39129, and United States v. H. Bayersdorfer & Co., 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 43 , T. … See Rapken & Co., Ltd. v. United States, 25 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 268, T.