Case law

In re Nalbandian

661 F.2d 1214 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 15, 1981

This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) affirming the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by the examiner of appellant’s application, serial No. 792,482, filed April … We arrive at this conclusion under Graham et al. v.

Hickok v. Commissioner

32 T.C. 80 · United States Tax Court · Apr 13, 1959

In LeTulle v. … In Bazley v.

Wales v. United States

145 Ct. Cl. 113 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 11, 1959

It appears that said Board again found plaintiff fit for military duty as of January 20, 1950, in accordance with the conclusion of the Physical Evaluation Board. After carefully considering the former case of Wales v. … Cromwell v. County of Sac, 94 U. S. 351 ; Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U. S. 591 .

Tindle v. United States

56 Fed. Cl. 337 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 30, 2003

Corp. v. … In Powell v.

07-02 698

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jul 31, 2014

See also Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995) aff'd, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996) [(table)]. … See 38 C.F.R. § 4.14 (providing that evaluation of the same symptoms under different diagnostic codes is to be avoided); see also Brady v. Brown, 4 Vet.

In re Bowen

492 F.2d 859 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 28, 1974

complying with the board’s statement, thus placing claim 2 in condition for allowance. … See In re Shokal et al., 1957 C.D. 234; General Electric Co. v. Wabash Co., 37 USPQ 468 .

191023-103541

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Sep 30, 2021

Hatlestad v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 524, 529 (1993). … Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet .App. 361, 363 (1993) (emphasis in original).

12-14 834

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Dec 31, 2014

Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518, 519 (1996), citing Gilbert. … See Hatlestad v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 524, 529 (1993).

United States v. Miller

5 Ct. Cust. 256 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 4, 1914

De Vries, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: Three appeals from as many decisions of the Board of General Appraisers covering importations of fish in tins. • *257 In United States, appellant, v. … United States v. Rosenstein ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls., 304 ; T. D. 31357); Ahlbrecht & Son v. United States ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 471 ; T. D. 32226); United States v. Smith & Nessle Co. et als. ( 4 Ct. Cust. Appls., 70 ; T.

The Conde Nast Publications, Inc. v. American Greetings Corporation

329 F.2d 1012 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 9, 1964

Co. v. … We consider apposite to the situation here the principle stated by this court in Clinton Detergent Company v. Procter & Gamble Co., 302 F.2d 745 , 49 CCPA 1146.

The Outdoor Recreation Group

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Dec 11, 2006

v. RDB Inc., 940 F.2d 638, 19 USPQ2d 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1991); and H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. International Association of Fire Chiefs, Inc., supra. … Corp. v. Hoshino Gakki Co., supra; and In re Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., supra.

Application of Claus L. Sporck

301 F.2d 686 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 4, 1962

Western States Machine Co. v. S. S. Hepworth Co., 2 Cir., 147 F.2d 345, 347 . … Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford, 214 U. S. 366 , 29 S.Ct. 652 , 53 L.Ed. 1034 .

Strickland v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 419 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 9, 1929

Hall v. Wisconsin, supra; Auffmordt v. Hedden, 137 U. S. 310 . … See United States v. Maurice, 2 Brock. 96, 102, 103 ; Untied States v. Germaine, 99 U. S. 508, 511, 512 ; Adams v.

Weeks v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 24, 2019

In Silverman v. … Brown v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 546, 550 (2006). The court assumes, for the sake of argument, that Ms. Weeks could have asserted a timely due process claim when she filed her complaint in the instant case.

Christopher S. Scoggins v. Department of the Army

2016 MSPB 32 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Sep 19, 2016

See Hooker v. … See Mudd v.

CTS Corp. v. Cronstoms Manufacturing, Inc.

515 F.2d 780 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 15, 1975

Hollywood Water Heater Co. v. Hollymatic Corp., 274 F.2d 679 , 47 CCPA 782 (1960); J. C. Hall Co. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 340 F.2d 960 , 52 CCPA 981 (1965). … See American Throwing Co. v. Famous Bathrobe Co., 250 F.2d 377 , 45 CCPA 737 (1957); Shoe Corp. of America v. Juvenile Shoe Corp. of America, 266 F.2d 793 , 46 CCPA 868 (1959).

Morderosian v. United States

228 Ct. Cl. 826 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 31, 1981

Huff v. United States, 216 Ct. Cl.383, 385 (1978). … Sanders v. United States, 219 Ct. Cl.285, 298, 594 F.2d 804, 811 (1979). Plaintiff has not shown that the Correction Board’s decision was improper.

Salinas v. United States

52 Fed. Cl. 399 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 25, 2002

Walker v. United States, 11 Cl.Ct. 77, 80 (1986) citing Spagnola v. Stockman, 732 F.2d 908, 912 (Fed.Cir.1984); United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882, 887 (Fed.Cir.1983); and Montalvo v. … Finally, “where an employee is provided a means of redress under the CSRA, that is, an appeal to the Board, the employee does not have an independent cause of action in the Claims Court.” McClary v.

In re Sebald

143 F.2d 366 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 22, 1944

Upon due consideration, and especially in view of the decision in Aronld v. Bishop et al., 1 Fed. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed as to both claims 8 and 13.

L. J. Christopher Co. v. Commissioner

27 B.T.A. 746 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Feb 13, 1933

assigned this action of the Board as error. … Williamsport Wire Rope Co. v. United States, 277 U. S. 551 ; Duquesne Steel Foundry Co. v. Burnet, 283 U. S. 799 .