1982 U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (1909-1982) Case Law
UNITED STATES DEPT. OF ENERGY v. DAUGHERTY
Date: October 22, 1982
Citation: 687 F.2d 438
Docket Number: 81-610
Date: October 22, 1982
Citation: 687 F.2d 438
Docket Number: 81-610
INT'L ORDER OF JOB'S DAUGHTERS v. LINDEBURG
Date: August 26, 1982
Citation: 687 F.2d 436
Docket Number: 82-572
Date: August 26, 1982
Citation: 687 F.2d 436
Docket Number: 82-572
WALLPAPER MFRS. v. CROWN WALLCOVERING CORP
Date: July 29, 1982
Citation: 680 F.2d 755
Docket Number: 81-550
Date: July 29, 1982
Citation: 680 F.2d 755
Docket Number: 81-550
UNITED STATES v. ASSOCIATED DRY GOODS CORP
Date: July 1, 1982
Citation: 682 F.2d 212
Docket Number: 82-18
Date: July 1, 1982
Citation: 682 F.2d 212
Docket Number: 82-18
UNITED STATES v. KYOCERA INTERNATIONAL INC
Date: June 24, 1982
Citation: 681 F.2d 796
Docket Number: 82-6
Date: June 24, 1982
Citation: 681 F.2d 796
Docket Number: 82-6
AH JU STEEL CO., LTD. v. ARMCO, INC
Date: June 10, 1982
Citation: 680 F.2d 751
Docket Numbers: 82-1, 82-4
Date: June 10, 1982
Citation: 680 F.2d 751
Docket Numbers: 82-1, 82-4
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC. v. UNITED STATES
Date: June 3, 1982
Citation: 681 F.2d 778
Docket Number: 81-31
Date: June 3, 1982
Citation: 681 F.2d 778
Docket Number: 81-31
C.J. TOWER SONS OF BUFFALO, INC. v. U.S
Date: May 6, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1268
Docket Number: 81-26
Date: May 6, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1268
Docket Number: 81-26
C. ITOH CO., AMERICA v. UNITED STATES
Date: April 29, 1982
Citation: 678 F.2d 218
Docket Number: 81-28
Date: April 29, 1982
Citation: 678 F.2d 218
Docket Number: 81-28
NIPPON KOGAKU (USA), INC. v. UNITED STATES
Date: April 15, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 380
Docket Number: 81-29
Date: April 15, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 380
Docket Number: 81-29
GENENDER WHOLESALE v. UNITED STATES
Date: April 15, 1982
Citation: 676 F.2d 672
Docket Number: 81-27
Date: April 15, 1982
Citation: 676 F.2d 672
Docket Number: 81-27
SSIH EQUIPMENT v. U.S. INTERN. TRADE COM'N
Date: April 1, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1387
Docket Number: 82-2
Date: April 1, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1387
Docket Number: 82-2
UNITED STATES v. TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC
Date: March 25, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1375
Docket Number: 81-23
Date: March 25, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1375
Docket Number: 81-23
ASHLOW, LTD. v. U.S. INTERN. TRADE COM'N
Date: March 12, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1265
Docket Number: 82-11
Date: March 12, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1265
Docket Number: 82-11
MONTGOMERY WARD CO. v. ZENITH RADIO CORP
Date: March 11, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1254
Docket Number: 81-24
Date: March 11, 1982
Citation: 673 F.2d 1254
Docket Number: 81-24
LIPTON INDUSTRIES, INC. v. RALSTON PURINA
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 670 F.2d 1024
Docket Number: 81-565
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 670 F.2d 1024
Docket Number: 81-565
IN RE MORTON-NORWICH PRODUCTS, INC
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 671 F.2d 1332
Docket Number: 81-540
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 671 F.2d 1332
Docket Number: 81-540
UNITED STATES v. HERAEUS-AMERSIL, INC
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 671 F.2d 1356
Docket Number: 81-19
Date: February 18, 1982
Citation: 671 F.2d 1356
Docket Number: 81-19
FARRELL LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES
Date: February 4, 1982
Citation: 657 F.2d 1214
Docket Number: 80-38
Date: February 4, 1982
Citation: 657 F.2d 1214
Docket Number: 80-38
FARRELL LINES, INC. v. UNITED STATES
Date: February 4, 1982
Citation: 667 F.2d 1017
Docket Number: 80-38. C.A.D. No. 1268
Date: February 4, 1982
Citation: 667 F.2d 1017
Docket Number: 80-38. C.A.D. No. 1268
JACOBS v. INTERNATIONAL MULTIFOODS CORP
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 668 F.2d 1234
Docket Number: 81-580
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 668 F.2d 1234
Docket Number: 81-580
ROYAL BUSINESS MACHINES v. UNITED STATES
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 669 F.2d 692
Docket Number: 81-12
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 669 F.2d 692
Docket Number: 81-12
SUMITOMO METAL IND. v. BABCOCK WILCOX
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 669 F.2d 703
Docket Number: 81-35
Date: January 21, 1982
Citation: 669 F.2d 703
Docket Number: 81-35
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.