Case law

Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,906 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 1995

None of Hughes’ HC-series satellites qualified for national security, foreign policy, or shuttle-unique status. … Hughes does not dispute that its satellites do not qualify for this category. .

Smith v. Comm'r

56 T.C. 263 · United States Tax Court · May 12, 1971

Each child thereafter executed an instrument establishing a trust designed to fund the annuities. … However, as we indicated in our Findings of Fact, the record before us does not clearly establish the precise chronology of the transactions which occurred between late June and early August of 1964.

Reeves v. Commissioner

71 T.C. 727 · United States Tax Court · Feb 6, 1979

And the decision itself was also stated with unmistakable clarity: We think, however, that the authorities have clearly established the applicable rule of law to be that the consideration for whatever stock is acquired by … For we must ask what rule of law the majority opinion establishes.

United States Steel Corporation v. The United States

367 F.2d 399 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 14, 1966

To qualify, employees needed 25 years continuous service with United States Steel or its subsidiaries. … Before 1952, as we have noted, there was no contractual basis for distiguishing between qualified and non-qualified plans.

United States v. Fries Bros.

37 C.C.P.A. 36 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 7, 1949

Appellee’s witness was a duly qualified chemist who had twenty-five years experience in the making of synthetic organic chemicals which involved the use of different kinds of essential oils. … It clearly appears that all of the constituents naturally contained in the oil when first distilled from the leaves and twigs of the tree are present, in the imported oil.

Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co. v. Bradstone Rubber Co.

109 F.2d 219 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 5, 1940

The question of the ability of the opposer to qualify thereunder does not therefore here arise. … It is well established that an allegation in a notice that opposer will be damaged by the registration of ■applicant’s mark is not sufficient to comply with the statute.

COLETTI

11 I. & N. Dec. 551 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1965

status to the "unmarried" son of a citizen or lawful resident alien makes it clear that Congress set up a Federal standard with regard to the term "unmarried," and that reference to foreign law cannot be used to defeat the clearly … He was fully aware that he was required to remain "unmarried" to 'continue to qualify for third preference status.

Belridge Oil Co. v. Commissioner

26 B.T.A. 810 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 16, 1932

Once the value of the land is established, the value of the option can be readily determined. … As such it has no value, for the reason that it is clearly distinguishable upon the facts, as fully pointed out herein. As a precedent, it is not binding.

USA Warriors Ice Hockey Program, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · May 16, 2017

Strategic Partners involved co-existing registrations each more than five years old and immune to attack on likelihood of confusion grounds. See Section 14 of Trademark Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1064. … Cir. 1985) (“While we are uninformed as to all the details of the disputes and negotiations, these competitors clearly thought out their commercial interests with care.

Davis v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

105 Fed. Cl. 627 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2012

This, in turn, triggered an immune response from the body which resulted in damage to the myelin. See Tr. 20:24 to 21:10, 22:19-25, 68:14-21 (Sept. 15, 2009). The government’s expert, Dr. … Davis’s ease, the special master in Calise found that the petitioner had established causation and was entitled to compensation. Id. at *28.

Strann v. United States

2 Cl. Ct. 782 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 30, 1983

BACKGROUND In order to qualify for a replacement check, the plaintiff must satisfy each of the requirements set forth under 31 U.S.C. § 562 . 1 Koch v. Secretary of U.S. … Deviations from the ordinary meaning of section 562 should be avoided particularly, since claims under this section involve waivers of sovereign immunity. See Flora v.

NEGUSIE

27 I. & N. Dec. 347 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2018

The negotiating history of the Convention clearly shows an intent to ensure that war criminals were not afforded refugee protection. … As the UNHCR has recognized, the question of how to interpret the treaty is clearly left to the States that adopted it. See id.

Nelson v. United States

16 Cl. Ct. 510 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 17, 1989

which demonstrated the existence of a contractual relationship between the parties. 5 On its face, the April 7, 1981 letter, however, represents only an approval in principal, prior to closing and subject to conditions clearly … Unfortunately, for plaintiffs’ position, one of the conditions to qualify for the Emergency Loan program in question is a borrower’s inability to qualify for a loan from any alternative lending source other than the defendant

Jemal's Lazriv Water, LLC v. United States

114 Fed. Cl. 512 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 19, 2013

Any tax assessment by the OTR, according to Plaintiff’s definition, will qualify as a full assessment because the OTR always considers the improvements that still need to be made to a property when it calculates lease-up … The ultimate aim of contract interpretation is to arrive at a definition that most clearly reflects the original intentions of the parties. Alliant Techsystems Inc. v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 566, 576 (2007).

Tammika Richardson v. Department of Veterans Affairs

2023 MSPB 1 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Jan 4, 2023

The parties have not disputed that the appellant qualified as a hybrid employee at the time of her removal. … § 7401(3) is clearly not mentioned as an exclusion to “covered individuals.”

Dowling v. United States

298 F.2d 941 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 7, 1962

This clearly appears from an examination of section 502(b) which governs here and which provided the times at which each eligible veteran should receive the designated sums. … Plaintiff’s appointment -was pursuant to 61 Stat. 796 , 907, § 515, which provides in part: “(e) In time of emergency declared by the President, or by the Congress, and in time of war, the President is authorized to appoint qualified

Warren Trust v. United States

107 Fed. Cl. 533 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2012

A waiver of immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4 , 89 S.Ct. 1501 , 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). … Plaintiffs Have Not Established That a Categorical Taking Has Occurred Even if plaintiffs could establish that government action had interfered with their property interest, they still would have to establish that taking

Sharpe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 7, 2021

Thus, a medical treater’s opinion that a vaccine likely caused a person’s injury might have some Althen prong one bearing (although less so than an expert qualified to opine on causation in a specific case), with the opposite … Clearly the significance of Dr.

Sipes v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 27, 2019

There is not a preponderance of evidence demonstrating that petitioner's OBS is due to a factor unrelated to his immunization.  6. … There is absolutely no agreement on the part of the parties hereto to make any payment or to do any act or thing other than is herein expressly stated and clearly agreed to.

Curran v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 22, 2016

On October 27, 2016, petitioner filed his immunization records and other medical records, but stated that petitioner was still “in the process of obtaining remaining records.” … conclusion of the law;” (3) “clearly erroneous,” or (4) that “the record contains no evidence on which the ...