Case law

Larionoff v. United States

365 F. Supp. 140 · District Court, District of Columbia · Sep 28, 1973

E. g., Fox v. Johnson & Wimsatt, Inc., 75 U.S.App.D.C. 211 , 127 F.2d 729 (1942); Aronsen v. K. Arakelian, Inc., 154 F.2d 231 (7th Cir. 1946). … Co. v. United States, 338 U.S. 421 , 70 S.Ct. 190 , 94 L.Ed. 225 (1950); John W. Johnson, Inc. v. Basic Construction Co., 139 U.S.App.D.C. 85 , 429 F.2d 764 (1970).

Malloy v. Gray

79 F. Supp. 3d 53 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 3, 2015

See Ashcroft v. … See Qassim v.

In Re Sunrise Senior Living, Inc. Derivative Litigation

584 F. Supp. 2d 14 · District Court, District of Columbia · Oct 28, 2008

of Directors (“the Board”), and some of its former and current executive officers (“the Executives”) as individual defendants. … Young v. Klaassan, 948 A.2d 1152, 1153-56 (Del.Ch.2008). 5 . An Order consistent with the Court’s ruling accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

United States v. Gibson

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 21, 2018

Gross, 784 F.3d at 789 (Brown, J., concurring). … (Brown, J., dissenting)(emphasis added).

Dye v. Pompeo

District Court, District of Columbia · Nov 14, 2019

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 557 (2007)). … However, the Court notes that the test in Browning-Ferris “is not terribly distinct from the primary consideration in the Spirides test.” Dean v. Am. Fed’n of Gov’t Employees, Local 476, 549 F.

Duro Pump & Mfg. Co. v. California Cedar Products Co.

11 F.2d 205 · District Court, District of Columbia · Feb 1, 1926

The California Cedar Products Company alleges iii its applications for registration that it adopted its mark in 1922, “for wall board in class 12, construction materials,” which the company manufactures and sells in the same … American Steel Foundries v. Robertson, Commissioner of Patents, and Simplex Electric Heating Co., 46 S. Ct. 160 , 70 L.

United States v. Dorn

169 F. Supp. 144 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 19, 1959

Three witnesses, not related to the defendant, testified at the trial that the defendant boarded a bus shortly before the robbery. … Edwards v. United States, 1958, 103 U.S.App.D.C. 152 , 256 F.2d 707 ; Mitchell v. United States, D.C.Cir., 1958, 259 F.2d 787 , certiorari denied 79 S.Ct. 81 . 2.

['SCOTT v. SOLIS']

District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 14, 2014

In this action brought pro se, plaintiff appears to challenge a decision issued by the Employees’ Compensation Appeal Board (“ECAB”) on August 21, 2009. See Compl. Attachment. … Chung v. Chao, 518 F. Supp. 2d 270, 272 (D.D.C. 2007).

United States v. Bourdet

477 F. Supp. 2d 164 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 14, 2007

In United States v. … V.

Kowal v. United States Department of Justice

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 3, 2021

(quoting Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190, 1194 (D.C. Cir. 2009)). … As outlined in Mayer Brown, 562 F.3d at 1193, the exemption is properly applied to information that “could reasonably be expected to risk circumvention of the law.”

United States v. Laureys

103 F. Supp. 3d 69 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 8, 2015

Id.; see also Cullen v. … In 2014 — four years after this Court, Judge Robertson presiding, issued the jury instructions in question here — the Circuit largely adopted the rationale underlying Judge Brown’s dissent. See United States v.

Touarsi v. United States Department of Justice

78 F. Supp. 3d 332 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jan 23, 2015

An Immigration Judge denied Touarsi’s asylum application while he was detained, but Touarsi successfully appealed that decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals, obtained asylum, and was released. Id. ¶¶ 18–20. … Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190, 1194 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (quoting PHE, Inc. v. DOJ, 983 F.2d 248, 251 (D.C. Cir. 1993)).

Miller v. U.S. International Development Cooperation Agency

818 F. Supp. 390 · District Court, District of Columbia · Mar 31, 1993

See NAACP v. Secretary of HUD, 817 F.2d 149, 157-60 (1st Cir.1987); Iowa ex rel. Miller v. Block, 771 F.2d 347, 349 (8th Cir.1985). Indeed, in Califano v. … The administrative law judge decided against plaintiff on the merits; the Board held that it lacked jurisdiction. .

Blackman v. District of Columbia

321 F. Supp. 2d 99 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 9, 2004

X v. … See Schneider v.

Eig Energy Fund Xiv, L.P. v. Petroleo Brasileiro S.A

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 8, 2022

Republic of Arg. v. … Carleton v.

Seifert v. Winter

555 F. Supp. 2d 3 · District Court, District of Columbia · Apr 3, 2008

that copy is from the 2000 edition of the manual, which would have been the version of the manual in effect when the Board of Inquiry convened in 2001. … Dingle v.

Bates v. Rumsfeld

271 F. Supp. 2d 54 · District Court, District of Columbia · May 30, 2002

Lampkin v. Connor, 360 F.2d 505, 509 (D.C.Cir.1966); Atlas Air, Inc. v. … Ecology, Inc. v.

Forbes v. Harker

District Court, District of Columbia · Dec 5, 2022

To the extent that the immediate custodian rule applies in this context, it is unclear here whether the Parole Board, see Guerra v. Meese, 786 F.2d 414, 417 (D.C. … Specifically, in United States v.

Ezeah v. Federal Bureau of Investigation

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 15, 2025

Mayer Brown LLP v. IRS, 562 F.3d 1190, 1193 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (emphasis in original). … Id.; Mayer Brown, 562 F.3d at 1193 (emphasis omitted). But the agency also should discuss foreseeable harm as a “distinct, consecutive inquir[y].” Leopold v. Dep’t of Justice, 94 F.4th 33, 37 (D.C. Cir. 2024); Reps.

Villabolos v. Britt

District Court, District of Columbia · Jul 29, 2022

Stokes v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 374 F.3d 1235, 1239 (D.C. Cir. 2004); see also Day v. Trump, 860 F.3d 686, 691 (D.C. … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977).