GADSDEN

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Powell v. Branman, 196 F.2d 871 (D.C. Cir. 1952)
  …, 89 L.Ed. 591; Farley v. United States ex rel. Welch, 67 App.D.C. 382, 92 F. 2d 533; Hurley v. Crawley, 60 App.D.C. 245, 50 F. 2d 1010; Gadsden v. United States, 100 F.Supp. 455, 119 Ct.Cl. 86; Id., 78 F.Supp. 126, 111 Ct.Cl. 487, certiorari denied 342 U.S. 856, 72 S.Ct. 83. See also Riley v. Titus, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 79, 190 F. 2d 653. . This was the requirement of Civil Service Regulation 20.9(d) as it stood on May 6, 1947, when appellant was notified of the pending reduction-in-foree action, and on June 2…
• Jacobowitz v. The United States, 424 F.2d 555 (Ct. Cl. 1970)
  …mstances is an abuse of discretion, is illegal, and demands redress by this court. See Clark v. United States, 162 Ct.Cl. 477, 484 (1963); Gadsden v. United States, 78 F.Supp. 126, 111 Ct.Cl. 487 (1948); 100 F.Supp. 455, 119 Ct.Cl. 86, cert. denied, 342 U.S. 856, 72 S.Ct. 83, 96 L.Ed. 645 (1951); Knotts v. United States, 121 F.Supp. 630, 128 Ct.Cl. 489 (1954); cf. Hoppe v. United States, 136 Ct.Cl. 559 (1956), cert. denied, 355 U.S. 816, 78 S.Ct. 19, 2 L.Ed.2d 33 (1957). This charge was minor in nature, was…
• Autographic Register Co. v. Philip Hano Co., Inc., 198 F.2d 208 (1st Cir. 1952)
  …ff against another defendant in the Seventh Circuit. Autographic Register Co. v. Uarco, Inc., D.C.N.D.Ill.1949, 86 F.Supp. 730, affirmed, 7th Cir.1950, 182 F. 2d 353, certiorari denied 340 U.S. 853, 71 S.Ct. 82, 95 L.Ed. 625, rehearing denied, 1951, 342 U.S. 856, 72 S.Ct. 71. We see no occasion to canvass the matter of patentable invention again. It will suffice for us to say that in spite of everything said by the appellant in its briefs and oral argument, reading the three opinions cited above leaves us…