Case law

Commerce Drug Co. v. Kirkman Laboratories, Inc.

461 F.2d 833 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 29, 1972

The board considered it, and appellee does not question that it is properly before us. … Compare Mead Johnson & Co. v. American Home Products Corp., Patent Appeal No. 8730, decided June 29, 1972, wherein TEMPURETS was held to suggest a modified or related form of TEMPRA.

Byrne v. Commissioner

65 T.C. 473 · United States Tax Court · Dec 3, 1975

Brown, 380 U.S. 563, 570-571 (1965). In Hercules Gasoline Co. v. … It followed the holding of Helvering v.

Harvin v. United States

661 F.2d 885 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 23, 1981

Relying on Mapp v. … In Silverman v.

Clairol Incorporated v. Roux Laboratories, Inc.

442 F.2d 980 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 13, 1971

The decision of that board is therefore affirmed. Affirmed. NEWMAN, J., took no part in the decision of this case. 1 . The board’s opinion is reproduced in full at 157 USPQ 392 (1968). 2 . … A. v. Comptoir de la Parfumerie S. A. Ancienne Maison Tschanz, Cust. & Pat.App., 441 F.2d 673 decided concurrently herewith.

Simplex Manufacturing Corp.

506 F.2d 1406 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 8, 1974

Young Associates, Inc. v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 438 , 471 F. 2d 618 (1973). By its action or inaction, it indicated its adoption of the Board’s. … Gresham & Co. v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 97 , 470 F. 2d 542 (1972).

United States Polo Association v. David McLane Enterprises, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Mar 25, 2019

However, because revenues are routinely treated as confidential information in Board proceedings, see Bass Pro Trademarks LLC v. … TBMP § 412.01(a); see also Noble House Home Furnishings, LLC v.

Pilgreen v. United States

231 Ct. Cl. 903 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 20, 1982

Before the Corrections Board, the plaintiff sought reinstatement and back pay and allowances to the date of the Board’s action. The Board, however, awarded him back pay only to May 1976. … In those cases where releases have been held not to bar additional claims, either the plaintiffs had two claims and the release of one claim did not release the other, Hiett v. United States, 131 Ct. Cl. 585 , 130 F.

STX Financing, LLC v. Stacey Michelle Terrazas

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Aug 26, 2020

Inc. v. … Cadbury UK Ltd. v.

In re Voss

557 F.2d 812 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 23, 1977

Corning Glass Works v. Anchor Hocking Glass Corp., supra. … See Crome v. Morrogh, 239 F.2d 390 , 44 CCPA 704, 112 USPQ 49 (1956).

Baginsky

221 Ct. Cl. 908 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 19, 1979

Camero v. United States, 170 Ct. Cl. 490 , 345 F.2d 798 (1965); see also Vitarelli v. Seaton, 359 U.S. 535 (1959); Service v. Dulles, 354 U.S. 363 (1957). … Where there is conflicting evidence, the board’s decision regarding the credibility of the persons appearing before it must be given great weight. See *913 Korman v. United States, 199 Ct.

United States v. Buss

3 Ct. Cust. 87 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 20, 1912

Such braids and hats were originally held dutiable by the board by similitude to silk braids and hats, respectively. But this decision of the board was reversed in Paterson v. United States (166 Fed. Rep., 733; T. … D. 29377), and that decision was later followed by the board. The board evidently believed that they were bound by the decision in the Paterson case and the case of Rheims v. United States (169 Fed. Rep., 662; T.

U S L Battery Corp. v. Commissioner

32 B.T.A. 810 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 21, 1935

McPherson v. Commissioner, 54 Fed. (2d) 751, affirming 22 B. T. A. 390; Helvering v. South Penn Oil Co., 68 Fed. (2d) 420; W. O. Menger, 17 B. T. A. 998; Continental Oil Co., 23 B. T. A. 311. … Board becomes final.

Application of Beck

155 F.2d 398 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 7, 1946

“The authorities we have consulted are as follows: Rule 94; Schreiber v. Bauer, 1919 C.D. 4; Tunstall v. White, 1926 C.D. 19; Haight v. Nell, 1927 C.D. 4; Chillas v. … In The Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co., 270 U.S. 390 , 46 S.Ct. 324 , 70 L.Ed. 651 , this subject matter is treated in a way that we think is convincing of the correctness of the board’s position.

In re Smith

481 F.2d 910 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 2, 1973

Conover, 443 F.2d 1386 , 58 CCPA 1366 (1971), and Snitzer v. … See Snitzer v. Etzel, supra; In re Robins, 429 F.2d 452 , 57 CCPA 1321 (1970).

David Hendy v. Department of Veterans Affairs

Merit Systems Protection Board · Jun 12, 2024

See Baldwin v. … The Board does not have jurisdiction over these claims in the context of an IRA appeal. See, e.g., Benton-Flores v. Department of Defense, 121 M.S.P.R. 428, ¶ 6 n.1 (2014); Smets v.

190624-10357

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Nov 27, 2019

Zevalkink v. Brown, 102 F.3d 1236, 1243-44 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Smith v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 330, 333-34 (1997); Landicho v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 42, 47 (1994). … JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Telamour The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided.

West v. United States

103 Fed. Cl. 55 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 23, 2012

See Sanders v. … Fisher v.

United States v. S. S. Kresge Co.

30 Cust. Ct. 645 · United States Customs Court · May 19, 1953

. 2, per 1,000 boards of 50 “U. … To support such view, counsel for the Government cites the cases of United States v. Baldwin Universal Co., 18 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 394, T. D. 44641, and Robinson & Co. et al. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust.

Stephen B. Linder v. Department of Justice

2014 MSPB 84 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Nov 7, 2014

Serrao v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 95 F.3d 1569, 1575 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (quoting Spruill v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 978 F.2d 679, 690 (Fed. Cir. 1992)). … v.

Safety-Kleen Corp. v. Dresser Industries, Inc.

518 F.2d 1399 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 7, 1975

Kautenberg Co. v. Ekco Products Co., 251 F.2d 628 , 45 CCPA 761 (1958). The board’s decision is in accord with this prevailing rule. … See Beef/Eater Restaurants, Inc. v. James Burrough Ltd., 398 F.2d 637 (5th Cir. 1968). Accordingly, the decision of the board is affirmed. Affirmed. . See Dresser Industries, Inc. v.