 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Frederick v. OPM, 05-3218,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An appeal from the MSPB was dismissed because, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.S. § 1204(f), the court lacked jurisdiction over an employee's appeal from denial of his petition for regulation review. The court could not consider the case because the MSPB found the claim barred by res judicata and had not reached the merits of the claim.
|
|||||
| Liggins v. United States, 2006-5049,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Non-bidding plaintiffs lacked standing to appeal the dismissal of a breach of contract action against the United States when bidding plaintiff did not challenge the final decision. The non-bidders were not injured when the United States rejected the bid.
|
|||||
| Love v. DOJ, 06-3071,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An MSPB decision which affirmed an ATF decision removing an employee from his position was affirmed because the employee did not demonstrate that the Administrative Judge's conclusions as to the seriousness of the sustained charges and the appropriateness of the penalty were unreasonable.
|
|||||
| M2 Software, Inc. v. M2 Communs., Inc., 05-1599, (Opposition No. 91/158,118),
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The PTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board properly found that confusion was not likely under the Lanham Act with respect to similar trademarks for CD-ROM products because the parties' goods were unrelated in nature and the marks were used in different channels of trade, which outweighed the similarity and fanciful nature of the marks.
|
|||||
| Remorin v. Office of Pers. Mgmt., 06-3084,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: MSPB's final decision, which denied an employee a deferred annuity under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), was affirmed because, since the employee never served in a position covered by CSRS, he could not qualify for the annuity. 5 U.S.C.S. § 8331(1)(ii) excluded a person who retired pursuant to an alternative federal retirement plan.
|
|||||
| Theus v. MSPB, 05-3265,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided , June 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| USA Video Tech. Corp. v. Movielink, LLC, 05-1451,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided , June 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Weliver v. MSPB, 05-3275,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 7, 2006, Decided , June 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
