Case law

Keith E. Brown v. Department of Defense

Merit Systems Protection Board · Jan 6, 2017

CID at 4 (citing Brown v. Department of Defense, MSPB Docket No. … review in Brown v.

Ronald J. Helferty v. United States

113 Fed. Cl. 308 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 15, 2013

See Helferty v. United States, 101 Fed. Cl. 224 (2011). During the Board’s reconsideration of Mr. … In Williams v.

Benson v. United States

4 Ct. Cust. 467 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 11, 1913

In Murphy v. Arnson ( 96 U. … In this case there was also a concurring opinion by General Appraiser Somerville, in which he reviewed previous decisions of the courts and board and cited the case of Murphy v. Arnson, supra. The case of Levi v.

International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. v. United States

509 F.2d 541 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 22, 1975

Given this fact, the Board found that the Government possessed, under Radiation Technology, Inc. v. United States, 177 Ct. … For the same reasons stated in note 9 supra, this court has made these findings of fact omitted by the Board. Liles Constr. Co. v. United States, supra; Foster Const. C. A. v.

Utah Construction & Mining Co. v. United States

339 F.2d 606 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 11, 1964

Cl. 432 (1962); but the Supreme Court reversed and held that in the determination of this question we were confined to the evidence admitted before the board. United States v. … In United States v.

Joseph Bell, Sophie Karp, Hyman M. Oberman, Lena Smith, the Rainier Company, Inc., a Dissolved Corporation v. The United States

404 F.2d 975 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 13, 1968

Corp. v. … Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation v. United States, 177 Ct.Cl. 184, 207 (1966). See, also, T. C. Bateson Constr. Co. v. United States, 149 Ct.Cl. 514, 518 (1960) and River Constr. Corp. v.

Westergaard v. United States

19 C.C.P.A. 299 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 25, 1932

Brown sauce: Wheat flour is browned and mixed with a little fat. … In the case of United States v.

Keith E. Brown v. Department of Defense

Merit Systems Protection Board · Dec 29, 2016

ID at 3; see Brown v. Department of Defense, MSPB Docket No. SF-0752-14-0310-I-1, Initial Decision (Nov. 4, 2014). … ID at 3; Brown v. Department of Defense, MSPB Docket No.

Stone & Downer Co. v. United States

19 C.C.P.A. 259 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 17, 1931

Again, we said in Casazza & Bro. v. … May Co. v. United States, 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 266 ; Diana v. United States, 12 Ct. Cust. Appls. 290 ; Kee Co. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 105 , T. D. 40943. To the same effect is United States v.

Trustees for Arch Preserver Shoe Patents v. James McCreery & Co.

49 F.2d 1068 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 1, 1931

Brown, Trade Mark Appln. Ser. No. 21*6,014, Filed June 19, 1925, Reg. March 6, 1928, No. 239,510. “Berenice Brown, Trade Mark Reg. No. 113,556, Reg. O'ct. 24, 1916; “Berenice Brown, Trade Mark Reg. No. 161.351, Reg. … Sharp & Dohme v. Parke, Davis & Co., 37 F.(2d) 960 , 17 C. C. P. A. 842; California Packing’ Corporation v. Tillman & Bendel, Inc., 40 F. (2d) 108, 17 C. C. P. A. 1048; Standard Oil Co. v. Epley, 40 F.(2d) 997 , 17 C.

Trans-High Corp. v. JFC Tobacco Corp.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Jul 2, 2018

Board, or by order of the Board. … v. Dowbrands Inc., 22 USPQ2d 1313, 1314 (TTAB 1992).

WONG

13 I. & N. Dec. 258 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1969

This fact caused the Board to enter an order overruling the special inquiry officer, which we with- drew on our own motion on February 23, 1968, when it was I See Wong Kara Cheung v. … Eeperdy, 66 Civ. 3969 (S.D.N.Y., unreported); Wong Kam Cheung v. Esperdy, 274F. app. 485 (S.D.N.Y., 1967) Wong Kam Cheung v.

Morris Shelkofsky v. United States

110 Fed. Cl. 15 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 20, 2013

Shelkofsky presented his claim first to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, so judicial review is limited to the Board’s resolution of the claim. Metz v. United States, 466 F.3d 991, 999 (Fed. … Walls v. United States, 582 F.3d 1358, 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

GONZALEZ

19 I. & N. Dec. 682 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1988

To the extent that any of the Board's prior precedents suggest a different result they are modified. 3 We recognize that on rehearing the court in Arauz v. … One would not know from reading this decision that any existed, and that they exist quite independently of Arauz v. Rivkin, supra, and Shahandeh-Pey v. INS, 831 F.2d 1384 (7th Cir. 1987).

K-E-S-G

29 I. & N. Dec. 145 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 18, 2025

Hassan v. … It is not the role of the Board to add a specific protected ground that was not included by Congress and the drafters of the Convention and the Protocol. See Chan v.

Instagram, LLC v. Instagoods Pty Ltd

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Oct 11, 2023

Consolidation is discretionary with the Board, and may be ordered upon motion granted by the Board, stipulation of the parties approved by the Board, or the Board’s own initiative. See Wis. Cheese Grp., LLC v. … Holdings, Inc. v. N.Y.

United States v. Pueblo of Taos

515 F.2d 1404 · United States Court of Claims · May 14, 1975

United States v. Creek Nation, 295 U.S. 103 (1935); Chippewa Indians v. United States, 301 U.S. 358, 375 (1937). Such takings typically generate awards including interest as part of just compensation, United States v. … Our decision in Andrade v. United States, 202 Ct.

RLP Ventures, LLC v. Panini America, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Sep 29, 2023

IP Holder LP v. … See Spiritline Cruises LLC v.

Dean Construction Co., Inc. v. The United States

411 F.2d 1238 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 20, 1969

Lee and Co., Inc. v. United States, 164 Ct.Cl. 365, 370 (1964); J. D. Hedin Constr. Co. v. United States, 347 F.2d 235, 245 , 171 Ct.Cl. 70, 84 (1965); Vulcan Rail & Constr. Co. v. … Plaintiff, however, would have us ignore these decisions on the ground that in United States v. Carlo Bianchi & Co., Inc., and United States v.

12-26 648

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Aug 27, 2015

See Hayes v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 60, 69-70 (1993) (citing Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 192-93 (1992)). See also Guerrieri v. Brown, 4 Vet. … When faced with conflicting medical opinions, the Board may favor one medical opinion over the other. See Evans v. West, 12 Vet. App. 22, 30 (1998), citing Owens v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 429, 433 (1995).