Case law

Epstein v. Commissioner

36 B.T.A. 109 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jun 15, 1937

A. 1381; affd., 79 Fed. (2d) 561; Helvering v. Stifel, 75 Fed. (2d) 583, affirming an unpublished decision of the Board. … A. 1088; affd., 88 Fed. (2d) 616; Keeler v. Commissioner, 86 Fed. (2d) 265, affirming an unpublished decision of the Board; Skinner v. Eaton, 45 Fed. (2d) 568; certiorari denied, 283 U. S. 837 .

Public Warehousing Company K.S.C.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Apr 10, 2014

Afro-Lecon, Inc. v. United States, 820 F.2d 1198, 1202 (Fed. Cir. 1987); Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1375 (D.C. Cir. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 (1980). … Campbell v. Eastland, 307 F.2d 478, 487 (5th Cir. 1962), cert. denied, 371 U.S. 955 (1963); United States v. Kordel, 397 U.S. 1, 12 n.27 (1970).

H-A

22 I. & N. Dec. 728 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2002

INS v. Doherty, 502 U.S. 314, 315 (1992); INS v. Rios-Pineda, 471 U.S. 444, 446 (1985). Any decision to grant a motion to reopen deportation proceedings is a matter within the discretion of this Board. See INS v. … V.

12-08 719

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jun 30, 2015

See Shipwash v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 218, 222 (1995); Flash v. Brown, 8 Vet. … Wood v.

Cross Co. v. United States

7 Ct. Cust. 43 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 28, 1916

We find, however, upon examination of the record that no such point was made before the board, and it appears that the board was under a misapprehension as to the state of the record in that respect, for, after deciding that … The question is therefore presented whether under these circumstances the board should have, without objection, dismissed the case for multifariousness. We had before us in Fuld v. United States ( 4 Ct. Cust.

In re Kluter

92 F.2d 906 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 6, 1937

Tbe board cited one more reference, McClevey, 1,396,515, of November 8,1921. … (Patents) 1114, 47 F. (2d) 970, we quoted from the leading case on this question, Potts v. Creager, 155 U.

Young v. Bullitt

233 F.2d 347 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 15, 1956

A., Patents, 1147; and Guinot v. Hull, 204 F.2d 281 , 40 C.C.P.A., Patents, 982. Those cases have been discussed extensively in the board’s decision and in the briefs of the parties. … in Kvalnes v.

Bayersdorfer v. United States

7 Ct. Cust. 66 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 1, 1916

United States v. Bowen ( 100 U. S., 508, 513 ); Arthur v. Dodge ( 101 U. S., 34 ); Vietor v. Arthur ( 104 U. S., 498 ); Bate Refrigerating Co. v. Sulzberger ( 157 U. S., 1, 33 ). … v.

In re Mulholland

43 Ohio Law. Abs. 485 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Aug 8, 1945

See also Hayes v Yost, Treasurer, 4 C. C. (ns) 455; Moore v Given, 39 Oh St 661; Davies, Jr., Auditor v Investment Company, 76 Oh St 407; O'Connor v Austin, 140 Oh St 7. … In the cases of Cleveland Theatres, Inc., v Evatt, 24 O O 148 and Tyroler Realty Company v Board of Revision, 26 O O 304, this Board held that the provisions of §5624-10 GC, do not authorize the remission of taxes and penalties

ONYIDO

22 I. & N. Dec. 552 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1999

The Indiana court in Houston v. … Houston v. State, supra.

Mark Freund v. Douglas A. Collins

United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 19, 2026

of Veterans' Appeals (Board) to the class and adjust backpay for inflation and interest.13 Concerning the objection about an allocation of the Board's docket, while the parties might have negotiated for such a term when … Class members who have their appeals reactivated will assume a place on the Board's docket that reflects the date of their Substantive Appeal. Thereafter, the Board's normal rules for processing appeals will apply.

United States v. Fragele Bros.

13 Ct. Cust. 144 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 15, 1925

We have recently held in Kuttroff, Pickhardt & Co. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 17 , T. D. 40861: The findings of fact provided for in said section SOI should be measured by the same rule. … But the board" found such a condition did not exist here. Counsel for the Government cite Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. United States, 11 Ct. Cust.

SUFI Network Services, Inc.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Feb 2, 2015

Court of Federal Claims (COFC) with respect to 12 of the 28 counts decided by the Board (counts I, III, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, XI, XV, XVI, XVIII, and XXII). … Count V, Other Operator Numbers Patching The CAFC stated: We agree with SUFI that the Board's determination on Count V is not supported by substantial evidence.

10-31 540

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Dec 31, 2014

Heuer v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 379 (1995); Falzone v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 398 (1995); Caldwell v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 466 (1991). … The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms of hemorrhoids, as they are capable of lay observation. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994).

Champion Rivet Co. v. United States

30 F. Supp. 234 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 4, 1939

opinion of the court: The contentions of plaintiff in this case are the same as the contentions advanced by it in support of its claimed right to recover the tax assessed and collected in Lehigh Portland *74 Cement Company v. … Compare Columbia Carbon Co. et al. v. United States, 77 Ct. Cls. 768.

In re Rosen

673 F.2d 388 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 11, 1982

This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) sustaining the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of appellant’s 1 de *389 sign as claimed in application serial No. 875,918, … The board, in affirming the rejection, added: The essential core of appellant’s design, when viewed as a. whole, is as stated hereinbefore, a round glass top table with three V-shaped notched legs which receive and support

Forjoe

29 I. & N. Dec. 463 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Feb 26, 2026

See Robinson v. … See INS v.

LOPEZ-TICAS

29 I. & N. Dec. 90 · Board of Immigration Appeals · May 29, 2025

Peppard, Assistant Chief Counsel BEFORE: Board Panel: MANN, MONTANTE, and BAIRD, Appellate Immigration Judges. … The Board also concluded that the Immigration Judge erred in finding that Niz-Chavez v. Garland, 593 U.S. 155 (2021), represented a change in law that warranted termination of the proceedings.

In re Pritchard

463 F.2d 1359 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 17, 1972

Particularly relevant to the present appeal for reasons which will become apparent later is the opinion in Pritchard v. Loughlin (hereinafter Prit chard), 1 53 CCPA 1344, 361 F. 2d 483 , 149 USPQ 841 (1966). … See Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298, 335-38 (1957); Partmar Corp. v. Paramount Corp., 347 U.S. 89, 90-91 (1954); Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591, 597-602 (1948).

Redcay v. Commissioner

12 T.C. 806 · United States Tax Court · May 20, 1949

Redcay v. State Board of Education (1942), 25 Atl. (2d) 632; (1943), 33 Atl. (2d) 120; and (1944), 36 Atl. (2d) 428. … Spring City Foundry Co. v. Commissioner, 292 U. S. 182 .