31 F.3d 1548

31 F.3d 1548 65 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 43,432 ENSLEY BRANCH, N.A.A.C.P.; Donald Nixon; William Moss;Alvin Mahaffey, Jr.; et al., Plaintiffs,Birmingham Fire Fighters Association 117; BirminghamAssociation of City Employees; et al., Intervenors,v.George SEIBELS, individually and as Mayor of the City ofBirmingham, et al., Defendants.John W. MARTIN; Major Florence; Ida McGruder; Sam Coar;et al., Plaintiffs,Birmingham Fire […]

Read More

31 F.3d 157

31 F.3d 157 63 USLW 2081 David R. HODGE; Marsha A. Hodge, his wife, individually andas parents and next friend of a minor, Joseph E.Hodge, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.M. Alexander JONES, Director of the Carroll CountyDepartment of Social Services, in his official andindividual capacities; Alan L. Katz, Assistant Director ofthe Carroll County Department of Social Services, in hisofficial […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1536

31 F.3d 1536 45 Soc.Sec.Rep.Ser. 320, Medicare & Medicaid GuideP 42,572KANSAS HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION, INC.; Kross DevelopmentCompany, Inc., doing business as Rossville Valley Manor;Vintage Group, Inc., doing business as Gatewood Care Center;Innovative Health of Kansas, Inc., doing business asLakewood Health Care Center; Americare Properties, Inc.,doing business as Pleasant Valley Manor and Moran Manor;Riverview Manor, Inc., […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1509

31 F.3d 1509 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.John J. HILLIARD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-1282. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. Aug. 3, 1994. James R. Hobbs (Marilyn B. Keeler with him, on the brief), Wyrsch, Atwell, Mirakian, Lee & Hobbs, Kansas City, MO, for defendant-appellant. Robert E. Mydans, Asst. U.S. Atty. (James R. Allison, Acting U.S. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1521

31 F.3d 1521 74 A.F.T.R.2d 94-5709 NATIONAL COMMODITY AND BARTER ASSOCIATION, NationalCommodity Exchange, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.Glenn L. ARCHER, Larry D. Bergsgaard, Joseph A. Brousseau,Frank Contos, Jr., Lester Furr, Patrick Henry, CharlesHolden, Paulette G. Johnson, John E. Keller, Gerald W.Leland, Donald Lewis, Albert J. Monica, Keith Mueller, C.D.Switzer, Ronald Urbanski, Darryl Watkins, Nathan Woodard,Charles Young, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-1031. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 153

31 F.3d 153 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.Jarrod Jeffrey HARRIS, Defendant-Appellee.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Jarrod Jeffrey HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 93-5818, 93-5826. United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. Argued June 9, 1994.Decided August 4, 1994. ARGUED: Thomas Ernest Booth, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for appellant. Susan Helene Cohen, Roanoke, VA, for appellee. ON BRIEF: […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1489

31 F.3d 1489 93 Ed. Law Rep. 547, 6 A.D.D. 422 PARENTS OF STUDENT W, individually and as Guardians StudentW, a minor, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.PUYALLUP SCHOOL DISTRICT, NO. 3, Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-35071. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 7, 1994.Decided Aug. 17, 1994. Charles D. Williams, Silverdale, WA, for plaintiffs-appellants. William A. Coats, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1499

31 F.3d 1499 40 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1327 Brett G. PALMER, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.CITY OF MONTICELLO and Kent Adair, individually and as Chiefof Police, Defendants-Appellants. No. 91-4221. United States Court of Appeals,Tenth Circuit. June 30, 1994. Peter Stirba of Stirba & Hathaway, Salt Lake City, UT, for defendants-appellants. Erik Strindberg and Martha S. Stonebrook of Cohne, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1478

31 F.3d 1478 1994-2 Trade Cases P 70,679 John Phillip SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.William B. RICKS, et al., Defendants-Appellees.John Phillip SMITH, Plaintiff, Jerome Berg, Esq., Appellant,v.William B. RICKS, et al., Defendants-Appellees.John Phillip SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.William B. RICKS, et al., Defendants-Appellees.John Phillip SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.William B. RICKS, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Nos. 92-16461, 93-15586, 93-16410 and 93-17300. United States Court of […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1467

31 F.3d 1467 63 USLW 2117, 39 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 1251 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Gustavo VALDEZ-SOTO, Defendant-Appellant.UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Fabio GOMEZ-TELLO, Defendant-Appellant. Nos. 91-10622, 91-10623. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 5, 1993.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. Michael H. Weiss, Berkeley, CA, for defendant-appellant Valdez-Soto. Victoria C. Belco, Berkeley, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1456

31 F.3d 1456 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Joseph M. PALOMBA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10061. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 11, 1994*.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. Joseph M. Palomba, pro se. Rory K. Little and Eric R. Havian, Asst. U.S. Attys., San Francisco, CA, for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1447

31 F.3d 1447 Bankr. L. Rep. P 76,024In re William EISEN, Debtor.Richard MONEYMAKER, Appellant,v.Melvyn J. CoBEN, Appellee. Nos. 92-15947, 92-15948. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Oct. 4, 1993.Decided Aug. 9, 1994. William Eisen, in pro. per. Vincent J. Quigg, Los Angeles, CA, for appellant. Cindy Lee Hill, Sacramento, CA, for appellee. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1411

31 F.3d 1411 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Donna A. HATCHETT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-3487. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit. Argued April 14, 1994.Decided Aug. 19, 1994. Lee H. Dodd, Office of U.S. Atty., Springfield, IL (argued), for U.S. Jon G. Noll, Springfield, IL (argued), for Donna A. Hatchett. Before POSNER, Chief Judge, COFFEY and FLAUM, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1428

31 F.3d 1428 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.GILA VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT, et al.; State of Arizona,Defendants-Appellants,v.GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY; San Carlos Apache Tribe; SanCarlos Irrigation District,Plaintiffs-Intervenors-Appellees. No. 93-15076. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 16, 1994.Submission Deferred March 25, 1994.Resubmitted July 6, 1994.Decided July 13, 1994. L. Anthony Fines, Raven, Kirschner […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1443

31 F.3d 1443 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Raymond M. GRAY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30213. United States Court of Appeals,Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 6, 1994.*Memorandum June 13, 1994.Order and Opinion July 26, 1994. William J. Genego, Santa Monica, CA, for defendant-appellant. Robert H. Westinghouse, Asst. U.S. Atty., Seattle, WA, for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1401

31 F.3d 1401 Robert T. FITTSHUR, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.VILLAGE OF MENOMONEE FALLS, Sentry Insurance Company, amutual company and Scottsdale Insurance Company,Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-2896. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit. Argued Feb. 23, 1994.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. Daniel R. Dineen, Milwaukee, WI (argued), for Robert T. Fittshur. Philip C. Reid, Cook & Franke, Milwaukee, WI (argued), for Village […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1363

31 F.3d 1363 George DEL VECCHIO, Petitioner-Appellant, Cross-Appellee,v.ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee,Cross-Appellant. Nos. 92-2553, 92-2622. United States Court of Appeals,Seventh Circuit. Argued May 5, 1993.Decided Oct. 26, 1993.Argued En Banc Feb. 8, 1994.Decided July 19, 1994. Matthew F. Kennelly (argued), Margaret L. Paris, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Chicago, IL, for George Del Vecchio. Arleen […]

Read More

31 F.3d 138

31 F.3d 138 39 ERC 1001, 63 USLW 2084, 24 Envtl.L. Rep. 21,243 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.PRINCETON GAMMA-TECH, INC., Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,Jeffrey Sands; 206 Center, Inc.; Hilton Realty Company ofPrinceton, Inc. (George Sands & Jeffrey Sands t/a HiltonRealty Company of Princeton, Inc.); George Sands; EstelleSands; Fifth Dimensions, Inc.; J & R Associates, Ltd.;Princeton Chemical Research, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1354

31 F.3d 1354 65 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 870, 63 USLW 2182 Henry Paul JACKSON (93-5233), Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,v.The CITY OF COOKEVILLE and John Gentry, City Manager(93-5232; 93-6306), Defendants-Appellants/Cross-Appellees. Nos. 93-5232, 93-5233 and 93-6306. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit. Argued May 13, 1994.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. Charles Hampton White (argued and briefed), Rebecca L. Wells-Demaree, Cornelius & […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1329

31 F.3d 1329 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Gary Jefferson BYRD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-4998. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. Sept. 1, 1994. David Randal Wagley, Opelousas, LA (Court Appointed), for appellant. Josette Cassiere, Michael D. Skinner, U.S. Atty., Shreveport, LA, Duro J. Duplechin, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Lafayette, LA, for appellee. Appeal from the United […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1341

31 F.3d 1341 Edwin PEAVY, Petitioner-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-3667. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit. Argued March 17, 1994.Decided Aug. 3, 1994. 1 Robert A. Ruggeri (argued and briefed), Cleveland, OH, for petitioner-appellant. 2 Ronald B. Bakeman, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued and briefed), Office of the U.S. Atty., Cleveland, OH, for respondent-appellee. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 135

31 F.3d 135 UNITED STATES of America, Appellant at No. 94-7000,v.Michael M. SCHEIN, Appellant at No. 93-7809. Nos. 93-7809 & 94-7000. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)June 24, 1994.Decided July 29, 1994. Michael M. Schein, pro se Appellant in No. 93-7809, pro se Appellee in No. 94-7000. David M. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1319

31 F.3d 1319 Jesse Dewayne JACOBS, Petitioner-Appellant,v.Wayne SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,Institutional Division, Respondent-Appellee. No. 93-2792. United States Court of Appeals,Fifth Circuit. Sept. 1, 1994. Robert B. McDuff, Jackson, MS (court appointed), for appellant. Margaret P. Griffey, Robert S. Walt, Stephani A. Stelmach, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Dan Morales, Atty. Gen., Austin, TX, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 130

31 F.3d 130 74 A.F.T.R.2d 94-5425, 94-2 USTC P 50,375,Unempl.Ins.Rep. (CCH) P 14029B UNITED STATES of Americav.Robert P. CARRIGAN, David L. Fendrick and Edward M. SullivanEdward M. Sullivan, Appellant. No. 93-5687. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued May 5, 1994.Decided July 18, 1994.Sur Petition for Rehearing Aug. 12, 1994. Gary R. Allen, Jonathan S. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1304

31 F.3d 1304 63 USLW 2135 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Ervin Charles JONES, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-5823. United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. Argued March 31, 1993.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. 1 ARGUED: Marilyn Gerk Ozer, Winston & Massengale, Chapel Hill, NC, for appellant. Robert Holt Edmunds, Jr., U.S. Atty., Greensboro, NC, for appellee. ON BRIEF: Barry […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1294

31 F.3d 1294 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Curtis Dale SMITH, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-5631. United States Court of Appeals,Fourth Circuit. Argued March 11, 1994.Decided Aug. 5, 1994. ARGUED: Steven Morris Askin, Askin, Burke & Schultz, Martinsburg, WV, for appellant. Thomas Oliver Mucklow, Asst. U.S. Atty., Wheeling, WV, for appellee. ON BRIEF: William D. Wilmoth, U.S. Atty., […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1276

31 F.3d 1276 24 UCC Rep.Serv.2d 119 RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, as Conservator forCommonwealth Federal Savings Bank, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.MAPLEWOOD INVESTMENTS, A Virginia General Partnership;James D. Heatwole, Ruby A. Heatwole; Nathan H.Miller; Kimberly H. Miller,Defendants-Appellants.RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, as Conservator forCommonwealth Federal Savings Bank, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.MAPLEWOOD INVESTMENTS, A Virginia General Partnership;James D. Heatwole, Ruby A. Heatwole; Nathan H.Miller; Kimberly H. […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1241

31 F.3d 1241 James J. GIUFFRE,v.Nicholas BISSELL; Richard Thornburg; Robert Smith; RussLeffert; Sam Debella; Richard Meyers; County ofSomerset, Appellants. No. 93-5541. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued May 2, 1994.Decided Aug. 4, 1994. Scott D. Rodgers (Argued), Welaj, Miller & Robertson, Somerville, NJ, for appellants. Frank P. Arleo (Argued), Arseneault, Donohue, Sorrentino & Fassett, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1259

31 F.3d 1259 40 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 34 J & R ICE CREAM CORPORATION, a Corporation of the State of Florida,v.CALIFORNIA SMOOTHIE LICENSING CORPORATION, a Corporation ofthe State of New Jersey; California Smoothie International,Inc., a Corporation of the State of New Jersey,Defendants/Third-Party Plaintiffs,v.Jeffrey K. BAUGHER; Richard Rossetti, Third-Party Defendants,California Smoothie Licensing Corporation and CaliforniaSmoothie […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1221

31 F.3d 1221 65 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 734,65 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 43,200, 63 USLW 2106 Nancy MARDELL, Appellantv.HARLEYSVILLE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania Corporation. No. 93-3258. United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. Argued Dec. 9, 1993.Decided Aug. 2, 1994. Joel S. Sansone (argued), Kelly L. Scanlon, Sansone & Associates, Pittsburgh, PA, for appellant. Roslyn […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1197

31 F.3d 1197 63 USLW 2092, 9 IER Cases 1560 John J. MARCHICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.LONG ISLAND RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 773, Docket 93-7521. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Dec. 8, 1993.Decided July 29, 1994. Leon D. Lazer, Melville, NY (Pamela D. Armstrong, Lazer, Aptheker, Feldman, Rosella & Yedid, of counsel), for defendant-appellant. Michael Barasch, […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1208

31 F.3d 1208 74 A.F.T.R.2d 94-5865 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Arthur MITTELSTAEDT and John Johnsen, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 1435, 1797, Dockets 93-1645, 93-1713. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 11, 1994.Decided Aug. 10, 1994. Marvin Zevin, Mineola, NY (Paula Schwartz, Frome, Yanelli, Zevin & Civardi, Mineola, NY, of counsel), for defendant-appellant Arthur Mittelstaedt. Judd […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1184

31 F.3d 1184 1995 A.M.C. 263, 308 U.S.App.D.C. 177,1994-2 Trade Cases P 70,684 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CRUISE PASSENGERS, Appellant,v.CUNARD LINE, LTD.; Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc.; PrincessCruises Company, also Known as Princess Cruises; P & O,Inc., also Known as Princess Cruises; Paquet Cruises, Inc.;Ocean Cruise Line, Inc.; Sitmar Cruises, Inc.; MarriottCorporation, also Known as Sun Line […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1188

31 F.3d 1188 308 U.S.App.D.C. 181 In re Oliver L. NORTH (PLATT FEE APPLICATION). Division No. 86-6. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Aug. 23, 1994. Before: SENTELLE, Presiding, BUTZNER and SNEED, Senior Circuit Judges.ORDER PER CURIAM. 1 This matter coming to be heard and being heard before the Special Division of the […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1191

31 F.3d 1191 LOCAL 342, LONG ISLAND PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES, UMD, ILA,AFL-CIO; Local 342 Insurance Trust, by Harry Hennessey andSal Fabbrocino, Its Trustees; all Present and FormerEmployees of the Town of Huntington Represented by Local342, individually; Harry Hennessey, Sal Fabbrocino,individually, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.TOWN BOARD OF the TOWN OF HUNTINGTON; Stephen C. Ferraro,as Town Supervisor and individually; Anne […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1179

31 F.3d 1179 39 ERC 1146, 308 U.S.App.D.C. 172, 63USLW 2148,24 Envtl. L. Rep. 21,363 SANTA BARBARA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT, Petitioner,v.U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY; Carol M. Browner,Administrator, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, Respondents.Western States Petroleum Association, Intervenor. No. 92-1569. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued Feb. 10, 1994.Decided Aug. 12, 1994. William […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 32 U.S.P.Q.2d 1847 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 33 U.S.P.Q.2d 1696 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1178

31 F.3d 1178 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 32 U.S.P.Q.2d 1496 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 33 U.S.P.Q.2d 1785 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 32 U.S.P.Q.2d 1505 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1177

31 F.3d 1177 SANTA FE ENGINEERS, INC., Appellant,v.John H. DALTON, Secretary of the Navy, Appellee. No. 93-1378. United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. July 13, 1994. Before MICHEL and LOURIE, Circuit Judges, and CARMAN, Judge*: Judgment PER CURIAM. 1 AFFIRMED. See Fed.Cir.R. 36. * Judge Gregory W. Carman of the United States Court of […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of […]

Read More

31 F.3d 1176

31 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision […]

Read More