LexisNexis
  

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.


   Federal Courts - Federal Circuit Court of Appeals - May 4, 2006

  
Miller v. MSPB, 06-3079, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: MSPB lacked jurisdiction to entertain the employee's appeal, which the MSPB characterized as one essentially alleging non-selection rather than failure to give priority consideration, because, inter alia, non-selection for promotion was not an independently appealable action under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7512.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Miller v. United States, 2006-5071, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided , May 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Paymaster Techs., Inc. v. United States, 05-5025, 05-5029, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Technology related to form sets for use with an imprinting apparatus for imprinting money orders. Because claim constructions were correct, the court affirmed on the issue of the USPS's use of plaintiff's patented invention. Damages judgment as to the royalty based was remanded for findings. The damages judgment was affirmed as to the royalty rate.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Pollitt v. MSPB, 05-3269, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided , May 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Robertson v. Dep't of the Treasury, 05-3156, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided , May 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Robinson v. SBA, 06-3065, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: MSPB properly affirmed the SBA's decision to remove an employee from a general attorney position where the record showed that the agency had a legitimate management reason for reassigning him to management position, his refusal to accept reassignment was sufficient grounds for termination, and he had waived any arguments related to a CBA.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
SNR Roulements v. United States, 2005-1297, 2005-1323, 2005-1322, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided , May 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Vaughns v. OPM, 05-3253, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 4, 2006, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: MSPB properly denied review of an AJ's rejection of equitable tolling and dismissal of a disability retirement application, which was untimely under 5 U.S.C.S. § 8337(b) because the employee did not dispute that he applied to the Office of Personnel Management 12 years after the deadline or that he was mentally competent during the filing period.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

  www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us
  CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.