Case law

15-09 318

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Mar 31, 2015

See Manlicon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999); see also Godfrey v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 398, 408-410 (1995). Accordingly, the Board is required to remand these issues for issuance of a SOC. Id. … The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

ADENIJIi

22 I. & N. Dec. 1102 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1999

V. … John v.

Waddell & Co. v. United States

5 Ct. Cust. 63 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 14, 1914

See United States v. Burlington Co. ( 3 Ct. Cust. Appls., 378 ; T. D. 32967) and United States v. Walter ( 4 Ct. Cust. Appls., 95 ; T. D. 33371). … The case of Traitel v.

JEAN

23 I. & N. Dec. 373 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2002

V 1999). … Lopez v.

Russell v. Principi

3 Vet. App. 310 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Oct 6, 1992

However, this Court may review only decisions of the Board; we have no jurisdiction to review Secretarial consideration of equitable relief under 38 U.S.C. § 503 . See 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (formerly § 4052); Darrow v. … We view deciding this issue as a task for the Board in the first instance. See Webster v.

Rhodes v. Commissioner

44 B.T.A. 1315 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 29, 1941

Hulburd v. Commissioner, 296 U. S. 300 . … The fact that he recited in his petition before the Board that he was no longer executor of Mr.

Loftin v. Smith

126 F.2d 514 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 23, 1942

The Examiner of Interferences on this phase of the law cited Funk v. Haines and Matteson, 20 App. D. C. 285. … There is no contention here that the Smith application related to an abandoned experiment nor is' the rule akin to the doctrine of estoppel applicable in Mason v. Hepburn, 13 App. D. C. 86, urged.

Lone Star Manufacturing Co. v. Bill Beasley, Inc.

498 F.2d 906 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 3, 1974

A. v. Girard Perregaux & CIE., S.A., 423 F.2d 1395 , 57 CCPA 996 (1970). … Proctor & Gamble Co. v. Conway, 419 F.2d 1332 , 57 CCPA 865 (1970).

GSI Pacific, Inc.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · May 6, 2025

NVT Techs., Inc. v. United States, 370 F.3d 1153, 1159 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citing Foley Co. v. United States, 11 F.3d 1032, 1034 (Fed. Cir. 1993)). … Oman-Fischbach International (JV) v. Pirie, 276 F.3d 1380, 1385 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (quoting Dale Constr. Co. v. United States, 168 Ct. Cl. 692, 698 (1964)).

Continental Nut Co. v. Cordon Bleu

494 F.2d 1397 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 25, 1974

” because this mark can be translated from the French as “BLUE RIBBON” and that, under Morehouse Manufacturing Company v. … Le Cordon Bleu, S.a.r.l. v. Continental Nut Company, 177 USPQ 734 (TTAB 1973). . Continental Nut Company v. Le Cordon Bleu, S.a.r.l., Oust. & Pat.App. 494 F.2d 1395 .

Los Angeles Trading Co. v. United States

1 Cust. Ct. 264 · United States Customs Court · Nov 30, 1938

This case arose by reason of the decision and judgment of this court, in Los Angeles Trading Co. v. United States, T. D. 47507, 67 Treas. Dec. 195 , relating to protest 410767-G. … I concur in Judge Brown’s conclusion, but have written the foregoing opinion for the sake of clarity.

12-24 465

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Nov 28, 2014

Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55 (1994). The Veteran's pes planus is currently rated at 30 percent under Diagnostic Code 5276. … See, e.g., Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384 (1993); VAOPGCPREC 16-92, 57 Fed. Reg. 49,747 (1992).

L. M. Jones Co. v. United States

178 Ct. Cl. 636 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 17, 1967

O'Donnell v. United States, 166 Ct. Cl. 107 (1964). … Morrison-Knudsen Co. v. United States, 170 Ct. Cl. 712 , 345 F. 2d 535 (1965); Ragonese v. United States, 128 Ct. Cl. 156 , 120 F. Supp. 768 (1954).

Laughlin v. United States

124 Fed. Cl. 374 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 15, 2015

See Bannum, Inc. v. United States, 404 F.3d 1346, 1355-57 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Santiago v. United States, 75 Fed. … See United States v.

Vincent Harrington v. Department of the Army

Merit Systems Protection Board · Sep 10, 2024

v. … Brown v. Department of the Navy, 102 M.S.P.R. 377, ¶ 10 (citing Peartree v. U.S. Postal Service, 66 M.S.P.R. 332, 337 (1995)).

Al Ghanim Combined Group W.L.L.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · May 18, 2026

United States v. Winstar Corp., 518 U.S. 839, 895-96 (1996) (quoting Lynch v. … And, the Board has no obligation to “scour the record” to prove a party’s speculative arguments. Parsons Evergreene, LLC v. Sec’y of Air Force, 968 F.3d 1359, 1368 (Fed.

Monroe M. Tapper & Associates v. United States

602 F.2d 311 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 18, 1979

Timber Access Industries Co. v. United States, 213 Ct.Cl. 648, 654 , 553 F.2d 1250, 1253 (1977); Anthony Grace & Sons, Inc. v. … Space Corp. v. United States, 200 Ct.Cl. 1, 5 , 470 F.2d 536, 538 (1972); Beacon Constr. Co. v.

In Re Air Crash Disaster Near Silver Plume, Colorado

352 F. Supp. 968 · United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · Dec 5, 1972

Brown, Sr. v. Jack Richards Aircraft Co., Inc., et al. Civil Action No. W — 4749 Howard L. Johnson v. Jack Richards Aircraft Co., Inc., et al. Civil Action No. W — 4750 Robert B. Krueger v. … Moore, Sr. v. Jack Richards Aircraft Co., Inc., et al. Civil Action No. W — 4752 Thomas B. Owen, Sr. v. Jack Richards Aircraft Co., Inc., et al. Civil Action No. W — 4753 Mary P. Stines v.

Shirley A. Edwards v. James B. Peake

22 Vet. App. 57 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jan 30, 2008

See Jarrell v. … Under these circumstances, the matter will be remanded for consideration by the Board in the first instance. See Maggitt v.

United States v. Holland-American Trading Co.

4 Ct. Cust. 336 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 26, 1913

Free acid as oleic. 22.13 Volatile petroleum. 5.37 Unsaponifiable oil (petroleum). 12.15 Saponifiable fat. 10. 32 Silica. 40. 25 Alumina and iron oxide. 5.25 Moisture. 2. 82 Lime, etc. 1.71 United States v. … D. 32536) and Bartley Brothers v. United States (ib., 363) seem to preclude the correctness of the collector’s classification and are referred to for authority and reasoning on that subject.