Case law

Portland General Electric Co. v. United States

107 Fed. Cl. 633 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2012

V(E). … DOE encouraged utilities to pursue exchanges, however, by creating an electronic bulletin board to facilitate exchanges.

Thompson v. Pettis

44 F.2d 420 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 1, 1930

Pengilly v. Copeland (Cust. & Pat. App.) 40 F.(2d) 995 , and cases therein cited. … Beidler v. Caps (Cust. & Pat.

Carl M. Halvorson, Inc. v. United States

461 F.2d 1337 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 16, 1972

Co. v. United States, 190 Ct. … Co. v. United States, supra, 190 Ct.

Tippett v. United States

98 Fed. Cl. 171 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2011

Plaintiffs burden is to show by “ ‘cogent and clearly convincing evidence’” that the decision of the board fails this standard. Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed.Cir.1986) (quoting Dorl v. … However, “ ‘when a correction board fails to correct an injustice clearly presented in the record before it, it is acting in violation of its mandate.’ ” Roth v.

08-28 187

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Feb 22, 2012

See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(b)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(o)(2); Harper v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 125 (1997). … See Johnson v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 7, 11 (1996); DeLuca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202, 206 -07 (1995); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.40, 4.45.

THOMAS

21 I. & N. Dec. 20 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1995

In Paredes-Urrestarazu v. … Similarly, in White v.

United States v. Palma

4 Ct. Cust. 140 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 6, 1913

This case is more like that of the United States v. … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Antonio A. Versaci v. The United States

403 F.2d 246 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 15, 1968

McGiven v. United States, 183 Ct.Cl. 920 (1968). Cf. Brozik v. … As was stated in Beckham v.

13-12 756

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Sep 30, 2015

This latter provision was added as part of an amendment intended conform VA regulations to Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439 (1995), and also limited the circumstances in which VA would allow aggravation. See 71 Fed. … Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet.

Environmental Safety Consultants, Inc. v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 190 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 11, 2011

Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.Cir.1988) (citing Zunamon v. Brown, 418 F.2d 883, 886 (8th Cir.1969)). … Plaintiffs’ claims cannot be transferred to an agency board of contract appeals because it is not a “court” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1631 , the statute authorizing transfers. 13 See Skillo v.

Midland Linseed Products Co. v. United States

10 Ct. Cust. 101 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 24, 1920

In tbe present case, furthermore, tbe decision of tbe board, acting as a classification board,' did not depend in any degree upon tbe dutiable valuation of tbe screenings, and it was not necessary for tbe board to make a … consider it necessary to inquire whether the fact should be regarded as a bar to the present appeal- We may note, furthermore, that this conclusion is consistent with the practice pursued in the analogous case of United States v.

In re Lincoln

126 F.2d 477 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 23, 1942

See Schiller v. Robertson, 28 F. (2d) 301, and In re McNeil, 1902 O. … (Patents) 1140, 57 F. (2d) 365; Schiller v. Robertson, 28 F. (2d) 301; In re Grapp, 20 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1042, 64 F. (2d) 376.

200110-54547

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Nov 30, 2020

See also Guerrieri v. Brown, 4 Vet. … When faced with conflicting medical opinions, the Board may favor one medical opinion over the other. See Evans v. West, 12 Vet. App. 22, 30 (1998), citing Owens v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 429, 433 (1995).

Mitchell v. Commissioner

45 B.T.A. 822 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Nov 25, 1941

See Mitchell v. Commissioner, 118 Fed. (2d) 308. … Griffiths v. Commissioner, 50 Fed. (2) 782 [ 2 USTC ¶766 ].

MPE Business Forms, Inc. v. United States

44 Fed. Cl. 421 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 29, 1999

Thus, the Court understands the Board’s desire to respond to the parties’ arguments even when the Board’s answer is superfluous. Cf. Massie v. … The ease is remanded to the Board for consideration of damages according to the Court’s interpretation of the contract. See Granite Constr. Co. v. United States, 962 F.2d 998, 1008 (Fed.Cir.1992); Teledyne Lewisburg v.

07-09 819

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Aug 28, 2015

Cir. 2001) (reopening after a prior unappealed RO denial); Barnett v. Brown, 83 F.3d 1380 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (reopening after a prior Board denial). … . § 5108; Evans v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 27 (1996); Manio v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 140 (1991).

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).

DynPort Vaccine Company LLC

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Sep 30, 2015

In sum, the Board's jurisdiction is defined by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978. E.g., United Pacific Insurance Co. v. Roche, 380 F.3d 1352, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2004). … See Burnside-Ott Aviation Training Center v. Dalton, 107 F.3d 854, 858 (Fed.

Key Chemicals, Inc. v. Kelite Chemicals Corp.

464 F.2d 1040 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 31, 1972

Corp. v. J. … See Breck, Inc. v. Armand Co., 42 CCPA 1099, 225 F. 2d 246 , 107 USPQ 8 (1955). The decision of the board is affirmed.. LaNe, J., concurs in the result. Reported at 162 USPQ 474 (1969).

Al Rafideen Company

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · May 7, 2015

In so doing, the certification "push[es] contractors into being careful and reasonably precise in the submission of claims," Tecom, Inc. v. United States, 732 F.2d 935, 937 (Fed. … Lehman, Inc. v. United States, 673 F.2d 352, 354 (Ct. Cl. 1982).