Case law

Rebosky v. United States

60 Fed. Cl. 305 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 4, 2004

Dodson v. United States, 988 F.2d 1199, 1204-05 (Fed.Cir.1993) (internal citations omitted). When making this determination, the “court will not substitute its judgment for that of the correction board.” Harris v. … Heisig v.

07-40 325

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jul 31, 2014

Reg. 45,711 (1990); Carpenter v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 240, 245 (1995); Monroe v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 513, 514- 15 (1993)). … Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet.

Ricks v. United States

65 Fed. Cl. 826 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2005

In Haselrig v. … In Berkley v.

Foote Mineral Co. v. United States

654 F.2d 81 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 1, 1981

The board has in a recent case held that brines containing sodium are not leaseable where the sodium deposits are not commercially valuable. United States v. Bardsley, 45 IBLA 367 (1980). … Ass’n v. United States, 225 Ct. Cl. 133 , 634 F.2d 526 (1980) (Medicare); Bur v. United States, 224 Ct. Cl. 52 , 621 F.2d 415 (1980) (civilian pay); Sanders v. United States, 219 Ct.

Harold Unterberg v. The United States

412 F.2d 1341 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1969

Towell v. United States, 150 Ct.Cl. 422 (1960); Uhley v. United States, 147 F.Supp. 497 , 137 Ct.Cl. 275 (1957). 3 . … See McCallin v. United States, 180 Ct.Cl. 220 (1967). The instant case is obviously distinguishable from Russell v.

Chenshiang Lin v. Department of the Air Force

2023 MSPB 2 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Jan 9, 2023

See Panter v. … Pridgen v.

DIAZ AND LOPEZ

25 I. & N. Dec. 188 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2010

The Ninth Circuit has not yet addressed whether it would accord deference to the Board’s intervening decision in Matter of Briones under Chevron, USA., Inc. v. … Ass’n v.

Neptune v. United States

38 Fed. Cl. 510 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 22, 1997

See Hill v. United States, 945 F.2d 1529, 1530 (Fed. … See Murphy v. United States, 993 F.2d 871, 872-74 (Fed.Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1019 , 114 S.Ct. 1402 , 128 L.Ed.2d 75 (1994); Sargisson v. United States, 913 F.2d 918, 921-22 (Fed.Cir.1990); Kreis v.

Vernon C. Applegate and John H. Howell v. Otto Scherer, Heinz Frensch and Gerhard Stähler

332 F.2d 571 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 11, 1964

The case principally relied on to support this theory, which appears also to have been relied on heavily before the board, is Smith v. Bousquet, 111 F.2d 157 , 27 CCPA 1136. The board correctly pointed out that Smith v. … Recently in Alpert v. Slatin, 305 F.2d 891 , 49 CCPA 1343, we expressed agreement with views of the Board of Patent Interferences characterizing Smith v.

Rieck v. Commissioner

35 B.T.A. 1178 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 28, 1937

It has been held that the question of what constitutes a “petition” is one for the Board to determine. Continental Petroleum Co. v. United States, (Dist. Ct., W. D. … Bonwit Teller & Co. v. United States, 283 U. S. 258 , 51 S. Ct. 395 , 75 L. Ed. 1018 . Reviewed by the Board.

Pfotzer

652 F.2d 69 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 6, 1981

[Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565, 579 (1975) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).] Accord, Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 377-78 (1971). … See, LSi *652 Service Corp. v. United States, 191 Ct. Cl. 185, 188 , 422 F.2d 1334, 1335-36 (1970). For these reasons, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted, and plaintiffs motion is denied.

Odiorne v. Principi

3 Vet. App. 456 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Nov 13, 1992

Since these claims were not addressed by either the rating board or the BVA, they are remanded for adjudication. See Douglas v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 435, 439 (1992), citing EF v. … See Hatlestad v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 164, 169-70 (1991); Martin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 411, 413 (1991). Here neither the rating board nor the BVA addressed appellant’s pain in its evaluations. III.

United States v. Furuya Co.

6 Ct. Cust. 207 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 18, 1915

The decision in Murphy v. Arnson, supra, was not at that time brought to our attention nor considered by the board. … , and it is in no way in conflict with the original view laid down by the board in T.

C-W-L

24 I. & N. Dec. 346 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2007

Compare Chen v. Gonzales, supra, at 760, Wang v. Board of Immigration Appeals, 437 F.3d 270, 274 (2d Cir. 2006), and Zhao v. Gonzales, 440 F.3d 405, 407 (7th Cir. 2005), with He v. … Sept. 4, 2007), Chen v. Gonzales, 490 F.3d 180, 184 (2d Cir. 2007), Haddad v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 515, 518-19 (6th Cir. 2006), and Guan v. Board of Immigration Appeals, 345 F.3d 47, 49 (2d Cir. 2003).

Jeffrey C. Stone Inc., d.b.a. Summit Builders

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Sep 17, 2015

Information Systems & Networks Corp. v. United States, 994 F.2d 792, 796 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (quoting United Coin Meter Co. v. Seaboard Coastline Railroad, 1 The Board's Rules were revised effective 21July2014. … Board Rule 16 was formerly Board Rule 35 and Board Rule 17 was formerly Board Rule 31. 2 705 F.2d 839, 845 (6th Cir. 1983)).

Colonial Metals Co. v. United States

495 F.2d 1355 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 17, 1974

The Board disallowed both items of damages. … There is no need, therefore, to consider whether the findings relevant to the claim of breach are entitled to finality as relevantly made in the decision of a dispute properly before the Board (United States v.

Casey D. Weathers v. Department of the Navy

2014 MSPB 57 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Jul 24, 2014

Department of Labor v. … See Clark v.

Bergstrom Paper Co. v. Commissioner

26 T.C. 1167 · United States Tax Court · Sep 21, 1956

The building and installation of the new cone cookers had been authorized by the board <? … C. 242 ; Brown Paper Mill Co., 23 T. C. 47 ; Nielsen Lithographing Co., 19 T. C. 605 ; Schneider’s Modern Bakery, Inc., 19 T. C. 763 ; Bulletin on Section 722, part V, subpart I (C); Begs. 112, sec. 35.722-3 {d).

210924-187742

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Oct 29, 2021

See Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362 (2005); Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 307-08 (2007); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Davidson v. … See Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 448 (1995); 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. As an initial matter, the RO made a favorable finding that the Veteran has a current disability with regards to his claim for skin abrasions.

In Re Boyce

144 F.2d 896 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 26, 1944

Kraft, 113 F.2d 115 , 27 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1408, 1409; Crane et al. v. Carlson, 125 F.2d 709 , 29 C.C.P.A., Patents, 879, 881; In re Lincoln et al., 126 F.2d 477 , 29 C.C.P.A., Patents, 942, 948; Foss v. … Even if we should be of opinion that it is not an applicable reference, we nevertheless could not reverse the decision of the board upon the reasons of appeal before us. The decision of the board is affirmed. Affirmed.