Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.50s
14 Ct. Cust. 38 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 17, 1926
Mead v. United States, 81 Fed. 684 ; Wilkins v. United States, 96 Fed. 837 ; Gump v. United States, 3 Ct. Cust. Appls. 137 . … American Sugar Refining Co. v. United States, 3 Ct. Cust. Appls. 69 ; United States v. Lozano, Son & Co., 6 Ct. Cust. Appls. 281 ; Lunham v. United States, 1 Ct. Cust. Appls. 220 ; Renick <& Ford v.
Cited 21 timesPublishedShirley 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.
Cited 2 timesPublished41 Fed. Cl. 547 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 1998
See Chevron U.S.A, Inc. v. … V.
Cited 1 timesPublishedNew Jersey Transit Rail Operations, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers
550 F. Supp. 1327 · Special Court under the Regional Rail Reorganization Act · Nov 5, 1982
See, Railway Labor Executives’ Association v. … In Union Pacific Railroad Company v.
Cited 9 timesPublishedWaddell & 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.
Cited 3 timesPublishedTeresa M Croskey v. Department of Veterans Affairs
Merit Systems Protection Board · Aug 20, 2024
Burgess v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 758 F.2d 641, 643-44 (Fed. Cir. 1985). … See Harris v. U.S.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished25 I. & N. Dec. 885 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2012
Stuchiner, Esquire, Las Vegas, Nevada FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: An Mai Nguyen, Assistant Chief Counsel BEFORE: Board Panel: MILLER and GREER, Board Members; KENDALL CLARK, Temporary Board Member. … Perez v. INS, 96 F.3d 390, 393 (9th Cir. 1996). Citing both Matter of Ige and Perez v.
Cited 10 timesPublishedUltra-White Co. v. Johnson Chemical Industries, Inc.
465 F.2d 891 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Sep 14, 1972
In re Calgon Corp., 58 CCPA 830, 435 F. 2d 596 , 168 USPQ 278 (1971); Salem Commodities, Inc. v. Miami Margarine Co., 44 CCPA 932, 244 F. 2d 729 , 114 USPQ 124 (1957). … See, e.g., Swank, Inc. v. Ravel Perfume Corp., 58 CCPA 948, 438 F. 2d 622 , 168 USPQ 723 (1971); Chun King Corp. v. Genii Plant Line, Inc., 56 CCPA 740, 403 F. 2d 274 , 159 USPQ 649 (1968); Cohen & Sons Co., Inc. v.
Cited 19 timesPublished536 F.2d 937 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 24, 1976
Schwab et al. v. Pittman 172 USPQ 59 [sic, 69]. … In Josserand v.
Cited 7 timesPublishedMidland 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.
Cited 4 timesPublishedPortland 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.
Cited 8 timesPublishedBoard of Veterans' Appeals · Jan 30, 2015
See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994). … BROWN Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedBoard 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).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedGold Star Co., Ltd. v. United States
692 F. Supp. 1382 · United States Court of International Trade · Jul 29, 1988
Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938); Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. United States, 3 Fed.Cir. (T) 44, 51, 750 F.2d 927, 933 (1984). … Alsthom Atlantique v. United States, 4 Fed.Cir. (T) 71, 78, 787 F.2d 565, 571 (1986); Kyowa Gas Chemical Industry Co. v. United States, 7 CIT 138 , 140, 582 F.Supp. 887, 889 (1984); Royal Business Machines, Inc. v.
Cited 31 timesPublishedArmed 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.
Cited 0 timesPublished94 Fed. Cl. 259 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2010
On the contrary, a military correction board is entitled to deference. Flowers v. … This Court cannot substitute its judgment for that of an examining physician, medical evaluation board, physical evaluation board, or the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records. See Joslyn v.
Cited 13 timesPublished8 T.C. 207 · United States Tax Court · Jan 29, 1947
In support of his contention respondent cites only Commissioner v. Rosenheim, 132 Fed. (2d) 677, reversing 45 B. T. A. 1018. … The motion to dismiss was granted by the Board.
Cited 17 timesPublished565 F.2d 1208 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 1, 1977
Appeal from a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (board) dismissing an opposition to the registration of LINE O SIGHT, application serial No. 448,893. We reverse and remand. Background Hollister, Inc. … In Tiffany & Co. v.
Cited 4 timesPublished9 Ct. Cust. 280 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 9, 1919
The board considered the protest and overruled it. … Pacific Creosoting Co. v. United States ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 312 ; T. D. 31407). In accordance with these views we affirm the decision of the board,. Affirmed.
Cited 25 timesPublished671 F.2d 1368 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 25, 1982
Hasselstrom v. … Foss v.
Cited 43 timesPublished
Ask Donna