60 F.3d 972 RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, as Conservator for ColumbiaBanking Federal Savings and Loan Association,Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William B. MACKENZIE and Ronald H. Timms, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 738, 798, Dockets 94-7674, 94-7684. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Jan. 11, 1995.Decided July 24, 1995. Fred G. Aten, Jr., Rochester, NY (Harter, Secrest & Emery, Rochester, NY), for plaintiff-appellee. […]
Category: 60 F.3d ___
60 F.3d 978
60 F.3d 978 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1577 David D. WOODS, Florence L. Woods, Kristine Woods andBenjamin Woods, d/b/a Callicoon Music, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.BOURNE CO., Defendant-Appellant,American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Defendant. No. 571, Docket 94-7421. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Feb. 3, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Robert C. Osterberg, New York City (Abeles Clark Osterberg […]
60 F.3d 978
60 F.3d 978 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1577 David D. WOODS, Florence L. Woods, Kristine Woods andBenjamin Woods, d/b/a Callicoon Music, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.BOURNE CO., Defendant-Appellant,American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Defendant. No. 571, Docket 94-7421. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Feb. 3, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Robert C. Osterberg, New York City (Abeles Clark Osterberg […]
60 F.3d 995
60 F.3d 995 10 IER Cases 1503, 40 Cont.Cas.Fed. (CCH) P 76,806 UNITED STATES of America, ex rel. James PILON and JillPilon, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION and General Electric Company,Defendants-Appellants. No. 1636, Docket 94-9232. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued June 16, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Robert W. Ogren, Washington, DC (Barbara Rowland, Piper & […]
60 F.3d 995
60 F.3d 995 10 IER Cases 1503, 40 Cont.Cas.Fed. (CCH) P 76,806 UNITED STATES of America, ex rel. James PILON and JillPilon, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.MARTIN MARIETTA CORPORATION and General Electric Company,Defendants-Appellants. No. 1636, Docket 94-9232. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued June 16, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Robert W. Ogren, Washington, DC (Barbara Rowland, Piper & […]
60 F.3d 964
60 F.3d 964 64 USLW 2077, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1617 TOUGH TRAVELER, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.OUTBOUND PRODUCTS, Taymor Industries, Ltd., and TaymorIndustries, U.S.A., Inc., Defendants-Appellants. No. 1691, Docket 94-9286. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 22, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995. Paul C. Rapp, Albany, NY (Susan E. Farley, Nicholas Mesiti, Heslin & Rothenberg, Albany, NY, on […]
60 F.3d 964
60 F.3d 964 64 USLW 2077, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1617 TOUGH TRAVELER, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellee,v.OUTBOUND PRODUCTS, Taymor Industries, Ltd., and TaymorIndustries, U.S.A., Inc., Defendants-Appellants. No. 1691, Docket 94-9286. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 22, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995. Paul C. Rapp, Albany, NY (Susan E. Farley, Nicholas Mesiti, Heslin & Rothenberg, Albany, NY, on […]
60 F.3d 972
60 F.3d 972 RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, as Conservator for ColumbiaBanking Federal Savings and Loan Association,Plaintiff-Appellee,v.William B. MACKENZIE and Ronald H. Timms, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 738, 798, Dockets 94-7674, 94-7684. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued Jan. 11, 1995.Decided July 24, 1995. Fred G. Aten, Jr., Rochester, NY (Harter, Secrest & Emery, Rochester, NY), for plaintiff-appellee. […]
60 F.3d 95
60 F.3d 95 42 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 999 PHOENIX ASSOCIATES III, Barry Silverstein, Dennis McGillicuddy, and D. Stevens McVoy, individually and as general partners of Phoenix AssociatesIII, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellants,v.Martin STONE, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee. No. 1019, Docket 94-7744. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued March 13, 1995.Decided July 12, 1995. David N. Ellenhorn, New York City (Harry […]
60 F.3d 95
60 F.3d 95 42 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 999 PHOENIX ASSOCIATES III, Barry Silverstein, Dennis McGillicuddy, and D. Stevens McVoy, individually and as general partners of Phoenix AssociatesIII, Plaintiffs-Counter-Defendants-Appellants,v.Martin STONE, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-Appellee. No. 1019, Docket 94-7744. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued March 13, 1995.Decided July 12, 1995. David N. Ellenhorn, New York City (Harry […]
60 F.3d 956
60 F.3d 956 19 Employee Benefits Cas. 1795, Pens. Plan Guide P 23911TThomas ALGIE, Vincent Ingoglia, Eugene Stanley, JamesPatrick, Wallace Carnegie, Carl Reddo, Stephen G. Safka,Jr., Joseph A. Coppola, George Eccleston, Edward Edelson,John H. Sharp, Henrietta Greco, George Tropiano, AnthonyAmelio, William Crouch, Joseph Fezza, Joseph Gleitman, JackGold, Calvin Gum, Pedro Richards, Aristedes Zagorianos, MarkStein, and […]
60 F.3d 956
60 F.3d 956 19 Employee Benefits Cas. 1795, Pens. Plan Guide P 23911TThomas ALGIE, Vincent Ingoglia, Eugene Stanley, JamesPatrick, Wallace Carnegie, Carl Reddo, Stephen G. Safka,Jr., Joseph A. Coppola, George Eccleston, Edward Edelson,John H. Sharp, Henrietta Greco, George Tropiano, AnthonyAmelio, William Crouch, Joseph Fezza, Joseph Gleitman, JackGold, Calvin Gum, Pedro Richards, Aristedes Zagorianos, MarkStein, and […]
60 F.3d 961
60 F.3d 961 23 Media L. Rep. 2243 LIBERTY CABLE COMPANY, INC.; Sixty Sutton Corp.; Jack A.Veerman, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.CITY OF NEW YORK; Ralph A. Balzano, Commissioner ofDepartment of Information and Telecommunications, NYSCommission on Cable Television, William B. Finneran, GerardD. DiMarco, Barbara T. Rochman, David F. Wilbur, and JohnPassidomo, Defendants-Appellees,UNITED STATES of America, Time Warner Cable of […]
60 F.3d 961
60 F.3d 961 23 Media L. Rep. 2243 LIBERTY CABLE COMPANY, INC.; Sixty Sutton Corp.; Jack A.Veerman, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.CITY OF NEW YORK; Ralph A. Balzano, Commissioner ofDepartment of Information and Telecommunications, NYSCommission on Cable Television, William B. Finneran, GerardD. DiMarco, Barbara T. Rochman, David F. Wilbur, and JohnPassidomo, Defendants-Appellees,UNITED STATES of America, Time Warner Cable of […]
60 F.3d 913
60 F.3d 913 1995 Copr.L.Dec. P 27,417, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1513 AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION, et al.,Plaintiffs-Counterclaim-Defendants-Appellees,v.TEXACO INC., Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Appellant.In re TEXACO INC., et al., Reorganized Debtors.ACADEMIC PRESS, INC., et al., Petitioners-Appellees,v.TEXACO INC., Respondent-Appellant. No. 1479, Docket 92-9341. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 20, 1993.Decided Oct. 28, 1994.Amended Dec. 23, 1994.Further Amended July 17, 1995. […]
60 F.3d 913
60 F.3d 913 1995 Copr.L.Dec. P 27,417, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1513 AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION, et al.,Plaintiffs-Counterclaim-Defendants-Appellees,v.TEXACO INC., Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Appellant.In re TEXACO INC., et al., Reorganized Debtors.ACADEMIC PRESS, INC., et al., Petitioners-Appellees,v.TEXACO INC., Respondent-Appellant. No. 1479, Docket 92-9341. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 20, 1993.Decided Oct. 28, 1994.Amended Dec. 23, 1994.Further Amended July 17, 1995. […]
60 F.3d 941
60 F.3d 941 42 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 825 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.John VALENTI, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1510, Docket 94-1462. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 12, 1995.Decided July 6, 1995. Michael M. Milner, Milner & Daniel, New York City (Emily R. Daniel, Michele Stolls, of counsel) for defendant-appellant. Douglas R. Jensen, Asst. […]
60 F.3d 941
60 F.3d 941 42 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 825 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.John VALENTI, Defendant-Appellant. No. 1510, Docket 94-1462. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued May 12, 1995.Decided July 6, 1995. Michael M. Milner, Milner & Daniel, New York City (Emily R. Daniel, Michele Stolls, of counsel) for defendant-appellant. Douglas R. Jensen, Asst. […]
60 F.3d 948
60 F.3d 948 76 A.F.T.R.2d 95-5601 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Seth WAPNICK, Harold Wapnick, Jon Wapnick, and StevenWolfson, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 647, 1305, 648 and 544, Dockets 94-1206, 94-1207, 94-1208 and 94-1209. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued April 11, 1995.Decided July 10, 1995. Joshua L. Dratel, New York City (Lefcourt & Dratel, P.C., Gerald […]
60 F.3d 948
60 F.3d 948 76 A.F.T.R.2d 95-5601 UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,v.Seth WAPNICK, Harold Wapnick, Jon Wapnick, and StevenWolfson, Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 647, 1305, 648 and 544, Dockets 94-1206, 94-1207, 94-1208 and 94-1209. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued April 11, 1995.Decided July 10, 1995. Joshua L. Dratel, New York City (Lefcourt & Dratel, P.C., Gerald […]
60 F.3d 906
60 F.3d 906 Donald A. RUBINOVITZ, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants,v.Grace ROGATO, et al., Defendants, Appellees. No. 94-2311. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard April 6, 1995.Decided Aug. 1, 1995. Edward F. Lawson with whom Denise M. Leydon and Weston, Patrick, Willard & Redding, Boston, MA, were on brief, for appellants. Thomas A. Reed with […]
60 F.3d 90
60 F.3d 90 1996 A.M.C. 301 Barbara Swift HOLLIE, as the Personal Representative of andAdministratrix of the Estate of Frances Mae Swift,Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,v.KOREAN AIR LINES CO., LTD., Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Nos. 907, 1057, Docket 94-7208, 94-7218. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued April 5, 1995.Decided July 12, 1995. Andrew J. Harakas, Tompkins, Harakas, Elsasser & Tompkins, […]
60 F.3d 90
60 F.3d 90 1996 A.M.C. 301 Barbara Swift HOLLIE, as the Personal Representative of andAdministratrix of the Estate of Frances Mae Swift,Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee/Cross-Appellant,v.KOREAN AIR LINES CO., LTD., Defendant-Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Nos. 907, 1057, Docket 94-7208, 94-7218. United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit. Argued April 5, 1995.Decided July 12, 1995. Andrew J. Harakas, Tompkins, Harakas, Elsasser & Tompkins, […]
60 F.3d 902
60 F.3d 902 UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,v.George S. BENNETT, Jr., Defendant, Appellee. No. 95-1051. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 1, 1995.Decided July 31, 1995. William P. Stimson, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Donald K. Stern, U.S. Atty., was on brief, Boston, MA, for appellant. Morris M. Goldings, with whom John F. […]
60 F.3d 902
60 F.3d 902 UNITED STATES of America, Appellant,v.George S. BENNETT, Jr., Defendant, Appellee. No. 95-1051. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 1, 1995.Decided July 31, 1995. William P. Stimson, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Donald K. Stern, U.S. Atty., was on brief, Boston, MA, for appellant. Morris M. Goldings, with whom John F. […]
60 F.3d 906
60 F.3d 906 Donald A. RUBINOVITZ, et al., Plaintiffs, Appellants,v.Grace ROGATO, et al., Defendants, Appellees. No. 94-2311. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard April 6, 1995.Decided Aug. 1, 1995. Edward F. Lawson with whom Denise M. Leydon and Weston, Patrick, Willard & Redding, Boston, MA, were on brief, for appellants. Thomas A. Reed with […]
60 F.3d 867
60 F.3d 867 32 Fed.R.Serv.3d 121 TEXACO PUERTO RICO, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees,v.DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, et al., Defendants, Appellants. No. 94-2076. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard March 8, 1995.Decided July 19, 1995. Lynn R. Coleman, with whom Pedro R. Pierluisi, Secretary of Justice, Roberto Ruiz Comas, Director, Federal Litigation Div., Dep’t. […]
60 F.3d 867
60 F.3d 867 32 Fed.R.Serv.3d 121 TEXACO PUERTO RICO, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, Appellees,v.DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, et al., Defendants, Appellants. No. 94-2076. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard March 8, 1995.Decided July 19, 1995. Lynn R. Coleman, with whom Pedro R. Pierluisi, Secretary of Justice, Roberto Ruiz Comas, Director, Federal Litigation Div., Dep’t. […]
60 F.3d 886
60 F.3d 886 UNITED STATES, Appellee,v.Frederick Alan PIERCE, Defendant, Appellant. No. 94-2182. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 1, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995. J. Hilary Billings, Bangor, ME, for appellant. F. Mark Terison, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay P. McCloskey, U.S. Atty., and James L. McCarthy, Asst. U.S. Atty., Bangor, ME, were […]
60 F.3d 886
60 F.3d 886 UNITED STATES, Appellee,v.Frederick Alan PIERCE, Defendant, Appellant. No. 94-2182. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 1, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995. J. Hilary Billings, Bangor, ME, for appellant. F. Mark Terison, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay P. McCloskey, U.S. Atty., and James L. McCarthy, Asst. U.S. Atty., Bangor, ME, were […]
60 F.3d 894
60 F.3d 894 UNITED STATES, Appellee,v.Michael T. CHAPMAN, Defendant, Appellant. No. 94-2154. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 5, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Peter B. Krupp, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Boston, MA, for appellant. Jeanne M. Kempthorne, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Donald K. Stern, U.S. Atty., Boston, MA, was on brief, for […]
60 F.3d 894
60 F.3d 894 UNITED STATES, Appellee,v.Michael T. CHAPMAN, Defendant, Appellant. No. 94-2154. United States Court of Appeals,First Circuit. Heard May 5, 1995.Decided July 25, 1995. Peter B. Krupp, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Boston, MA, for appellant. Jeanne M. Kempthorne, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Donald K. Stern, U.S. Atty., Boston, MA, was on brief, for […]
60 F.3d 852
60 F.3d 852 314 U.S.App.D.C. 9 Rodney R. SWEETLAND III, Appellant,v.Gary J. WALTERS, Chief Usher, Executive Residence, The WhiteHouse, Appellee. No. 93-5411. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued January 10, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Rodney R. Sweetland III argued the cause and filed the briefs pro se. Matthew M. Collette, Atty., U.S. […]
60 F.3d 855
60 F.3d 855 149 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2973, 314 U.S.App.D.C. 12,130 Lab.Cas. P 11,384 C.C. EASTERN, INC., Petitioner,v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. No. 94-1115. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 21, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Jeffrey L. Braff, Philadelphia, PA, argued the cause and filed the briefs, for petitioner. Deborah E. Shrager, […]
60 F.3d 855
60 F.3d 855 149 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2973, 314 U.S.App.D.C. 12,130 Lab.Cas. P 11,384 C.C. EASTERN, INC., Petitioner,v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. No. 94-1115. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 21, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Jeffrey L. Braff, Philadelphia, PA, argued the cause and filed the briefs, for petitioner. Deborah E. Shrager, […]
60 F.3d 861
60 F.3d 861 314 U.S.App.D.C. 18, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1627 Jack B. PFEIFFER, Appellant,v.CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY and United States of America, Appellees. No. 94-5107. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 23, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 91cv00736). Paul A. Levy, […]
60 F.3d 861
60 F.3d 861 314 U.S.App.D.C. 18, 35 U.S.P.Q.2d 1627 Jack B. PFEIFFER, Appellant,v.CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY and United States of America, Appellees. No. 94-5107. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 23, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 91cv00736). Paul A. Levy, […]
60 F.3d 844
60 F.3d 844 314 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 130 Lab.Cas. P 57,956,1995-2 Trade Cases P 71,066, 32 Fed.R.Serv.3d 448 Scott J. RAFFERTY, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,v.NYNEX CORPORATION, et al., Appellees/Cross-Appellants. Nos. 93-7220, 93-7222. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 7, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995.Rehearing and Suggestion for Rehearing In Banc Denied Oct.18, 1995.* On Appeal from […]
60 F.3d 844
60 F.3d 844 314 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 130 Lab.Cas. P 57,956,1995-2 Trade Cases P 71,066, 32 Fed.R.Serv.3d 448 Scott J. RAFFERTY, Appellant/Cross-Appellee,v.NYNEX CORPORATION, et al., Appellees/Cross-Appellants. Nos. 93-7220, 93-7222. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued March 7, 1995.Decided July 21, 1995.Rehearing and Suggestion for Rehearing In Banc Denied Oct.18, 1995.* On Appeal from […]
60 F.3d 852
60 F.3d 852 314 U.S.App.D.C. 9 Rodney R. SWEETLAND III, Appellant,v.Gary J. WALTERS, Chief Usher, Executive Residence, The WhiteHouse, Appellee. No. 93-5411. United States Court of Appeals,District of Columbia Circuit. Argued January 10, 1995.Decided August 1, 1995. Rodney R. Sweetland III argued the cause and filed the briefs pro se. Matthew M. Collette, Atty., U.S. […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 76 A.F.T.R.2d 95-5301, 95-2 USTC P 50,425 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 76 A.F.T.R.2d 95-5301, 95-2 USTC P 50,425 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 36 U.S.P.Q.2d 1510 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 36 U.S.P.Q.2d 1510 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 76 A.F.T.R.2d 95-5356 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 842
60 F.3d 842NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 842
60 F.3d 842NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 842
60 F.3d 842NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 842
60 F.3d 842NOTICE: 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 38 U.S.P.Q.2d 1216 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 […]
60 F.3d 843
60 F.3d 843 38 U.S.P.Q.2d 1216 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 […]