Case law

M.C.I. Foods, Inc. v. Brady Bunte

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Feb 19, 2008

P. 33(b)(4); Envirotech Corp. v. … No Fear v.

Mendez v. United States

108 Fed. Cl. 350 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 20, 2012

Metz v. United States, 466 F.3d 991, 998 (Fed.Cir.2006). Plaintiffs burden is to show by “cogent and clearly convincing evidence” that the decision of the correction board fails this standard. Wronke v. … Plaintiff also must overcome the presumption of regularity that attaches to the actions of a correction board. See Richey v.

Victory Markets, Inc. v. Commissioner

99 T.C. 648 · United States Tax Court · Dec 23, 1992

The taxpayer, relying on Commissioner v. … Chelrob, Inc. v. Barrett, 57 N.E.2d 825 (N.Y. 1944); Lippel v. Hirsch, 119 N.Y.S.2d 453 (Sup. Ct. 1953).

Sugerman v. Commissioner

20 B.T.A. 960 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Sep 24, 1930

SUGERMAN, EXECUTOR, ESTATE OF PHILIP SUGERMAN, PETITIONER, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, RESPONDENT. Sugerman v. Commissioner Docket No. 39415. … Reviewed by the Board. Judgment will be *2008 entered for the respondent.

P. H. McLaughlin & Co. v. United States

37 Ct. Cl. 150 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 17, 1902

(Dermott v. Jones, 2 Wall., 1 ; Cutter v. Powell, 2 Smith’s Leading Cases 1, 7 Am. ed.) … (Coulter v. Board of Education, 63 N. Y. Rep., 365 .)

Gilbreth v. United States

94 Fed. Cl. 88 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 27, 2010

Though filing subsequent appeals to the corrections board will not usually toll a plaintiffs claim, see Van Allen v. … United States 70 Fed.Cl. 57, 63 (2006), if the “armed service itself reopens the case,” the previous board’s action is not final. Friedman v. United States, 159 Ct.Cl. 1 , 310 F.2d 381, 396 (1962); see also Bricker v.

E.D.S. Federal Corp. v. United States

31 Cont. Cas. Fed. 71,314 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 6, 1983

United States v. Turtle Mountain Band, 222 Ct.Cl. at 8 , 621 F.2d at 521, quoting from Zdanok v. … Federal Corp. v.

09-05 380

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Aug 27, 2015

See Soyini v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 540, 546 (1991); Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994). … Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55, 58 (1994).

Mills v. Commissioner

1 B.T.A. 199 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Dec 18, 1924

, or require this Board to take a similar beneficent attitude that Congress has not seen fit to give the Board power to take. … That has very recently been decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the New York Central v.

Maitland Bros. v. United States

36 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,835 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 28, 1990

With respect to the Board’s legal determinations, the Wunderlich Act permits this court to determine whether the Board’s decisions are erroneous. National Civil Ser. League v. … Corps v. United States, 600 F.2d 793, 797 , 220 Ct.Cl. 594 (1979); Tecon v. United States, 188 Ct.Cl. 436 , 411 F.2d 1271 (1969); San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace v.

10-01 288

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Feb 29, 2016

The Board can accept and rate based on private audiometric test scores that are provided in graph form. See Kelly v. Brown, 7 Vet. … See Bagwell v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 337 (1996); Shipwash v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 218, 227 (1995). The Court, in Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet.

In re Smith

458 F.2d 1389 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 18, 1972

See Martin v. Johnson, supra; In re Lukach, 58 CCPA 1233, 443 F. 2d 967 , 169 USPQ 795 (1971). … Compare Martin v. Johnson, supra; Fields v.

In re Cohen

133 F.2d 924 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 1, 1943

electrode and cable, and we find nothing in the record to indicate that any diameter of electrode or any length of cable would be sufficient to produce the phase shift. *883 Upon the subject of inherency in the case.of Hansgirg v. … See General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. et al., 304 U. S. 364 . Claim 23, rejected upon Knowles, reads as 'follows: 23.

Yul Lim Construction Co., Ltd.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Jul 15, 2025

It is well settled that once a contractor files an appeal, the contracting officer’s determination of partial entitlement is not binding on the parties; the Board’s proceedings are de novo. Wilner v. … Co. v. U.S., 28 Fed. Cl. 572, 577 (1993).

Chisolm v. United States

82 Fed. Cl. 185 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 30, 2008

requests should be considered by the board. … Whatever the rule of accrual might be in APA challenges to board decisions, such challenges are in any event not within our jurisdiction. Id. at 1313 (citing Murphy v.

Richard Young v. Department of Agriculture

Merit Systems Protection Board · Jun 16, 2026

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD RICHARD YOUNG, DOCKET NUMBER Appellant, DC-0752-19-0658-B-1 v. … Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit), within 30 calendar days after you receive this decision. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2); see Perry v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 582 U.S. 420 (2017).

Kutz v. United States

168 Ct. Cl. 68 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 13, 1964

In 1950 the Board decided otherwise on the basis of new evidence. See Kutz v. United States, 132 Ct. Cl. 329, 331-32 , 132 F. Supp. 117, 118-19 (1955). … The Correction Board later back-dated the advancement to the date of the 1942 Act. See footnote 2, supra. See, e.g., Friedman v. United States, supra; Carver v. United States, 159 Ct. Cl. 67, 74 (1962) ; Morris v.

R-A-V-P

27 I. & N. Dec. 803 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2020

Lampert, Esquire BEFORE: Board Panel: MALPHRUS, Acting Chairman; LIEBOWITZ, Board Member; MORRIS, Temporary Board Member. … See Matter of D-J-, 23 I&N Dec. 572, 575 (A.G. 2003) (citing Carlson v. Landon, 342 U.S. 524, 534 (1952)); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.19(a), 1236.1(d)(1) (2019).

Law v. United States

26 Cl. Ct. 382 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 30, 1992

V. … The Claims Court is “neither a super corrections board nor a selection board” and lacks authority to promote. Kien v.

Application of Marwan R. Kamal and Edgar R. Rogier

398 F.2d 867 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 3, 1968

Moreover, despite appellants’ specific request for evidence of the factual basis for the board’s decision, the board has provided no such evidence. … See In re Spormann, 53 CCPA 1375, 363 F.2d 444 (1966); Bray v. Tears, 26 CCPA 1103, 102 F.2d 877 (1939).