green
Positive treatment
13.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1962 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1962
1994
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Richard E. Fleshman, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Koyo Seiko Co. v. United States, 95 F.3d 1094, 1099-1102 (Fed.Cir.1996); Arkansas AFL-CIO v. FCC, 11 F.3d 1430 , 1439-40 (8th Cir.1993); NLRB v. American Geri-Care, Inc., 697 F.2d 56, 64 (2d Cir.1982); Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 294 F.2d 231, 233-34 (D.C.Cir.1961).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Koyo Seiko Co., Ltd. And Koyo Corporation of U.S.A. v. The United States and the Timken Company
See Arkansas AFL-CIO v. FCC, 11 F.3d 1430 , 1439 (8th Cir.1993) (“[T]he Supreme Court clearly limited Chenery to situations in which the agency failed to make a necessary determination of fact or of policy.”); NLRB v. American Geri-Care, Inc., 697 F.2d 56, 64 (2d Cir.1982) (“[T]he Chenery doctrine, as Professor Davis has rightly said, has been ‘softened in its application.’ It does not mean that a reversal and remand are required each and every time an administrative agency assigns a wrong reason for its action; rather, it requires reversal and remand only where there is a significan…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Shea v. Director, Office Of Workers' Compensation Programs
But that statement "is to be understood with a qualification; the order must be judged upon the grounds upon which action was based, unless the appellate court concludes that the decision 'already made ... should properly be based on another ground within the power of the appellate court to formulate.' " Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 294 F.2d 231, 234 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Lee v. Kennedy, 368 U.S. 926 , 82 S.Ct. 362 , 7 L.Ed.2d 190 (1961) (quoting Chenery, 318 U.S. at 88 , 63 S.Ct. at 459 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Shea, S & M Ball Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs
But that statement "is to be understood with a qualification; the order must be judged upon the grounds upon which action was based, unless the appellate court concludes that the decision 'already made ... should properly be based on another ground within the power of the appellate court to formulate.”’ Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 294 F.2d 231, 234 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Lee v. Kennedy, 368 U.S. 926 , 82 S.Ct. 362 , 7 L.Ed.2d 190 (1961) (quoting Chenery, 318 U.S. at 88 , 63 S.Ct. at 459 ).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Sandella Spears v. Merit Systems Protection Board
See Horne v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 684 F.2d 155 , 158 n. 4 (D.C.Cir.1982); Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 294 F.2d 231, 234 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 368 U.S. 926 , 82 S.Ct. 362 , 7 L.Ed.2d 190 (1961).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
National Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America, Accuracy in Media, Inc., Intervenor
(2×)
The corollary is that a court may not reverse on a ground other than that considered by the agency unless the agency’s decision cannot be sustained on any set of facts, see Williams, supra at 940, or the matter were one “within the power of ... an appellate court to formulate.” Local 833, UAW v. NLRB, 112 U.S.App.D.C. 107 , 300 F.2d 699 , 705, cert. denied, 370 U.S. 911 , 82 S.Ct. 1258 , 8 L.Ed.2d 405 (1962) citing Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 35 , 294 F.2d 231, 234 (1961).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Albert Gueory v. Robert E. Hampton (Chairman of the United States Civil Service Commission)
Kohler Co. v. NLRB, 382 U.S. 836 , 86 S.Ct. 82 , 15 L.Ed.2d 79 (1965), citing Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 35 , 294 F.2d 231, 234 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied 368 U.S. 926 , 82 S.Ct. 362 , 7 L.Ed.2d 190 (1961). 14 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
The Citizens Association of Georgetown, Inc. v. Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia the Citizens Association of Georgetown, Inc. And the Committee of 100 on the Federal City v. Zoning Commission of the District of Columbia
(2×)
In certain circumstances an NCPC report might serve a function roughly analogous to that of a legislative committee report, but, since the Commission rejected the NCPC's recommendation in this instance, we do not even have the benefit of that guidance. 29 SEC v. Chenery Corp., 318 U.S. 80 , 63 S.Ct. 454 , 87 L.Ed. 626 (1943); cf. ChaeSik Lee v. Kennedy, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 35, 38 , 294 F.2d 231, 234 (1961) 30 Today's decision, requiring a statement of reasons in the zoning context, is not a novel one.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Citizens Ass'n of Georgetown, Inc. v. Zoning Commission
(2×)
SEC v. Chenery Corp., 318 U.S. 80 , 63 S.Ct. 454 , 87 L.Ed. 626 (1943) ; cf. ChaeSik Lee v. Kennedy, 111 U.S.App.D.C. 35, 38 , 294 F.2d 231, 234 (1961). .
cited
Cited "see"
Poole Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission
See Chae-Sik Lee v. Kennedy, 111 U.S. App.D.C. 35, 294 F.2d 231 (1961). .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Roy Y. SANDERS, Jr., Appellant
v.
David L. LADD, Commissioner of Patents, Appellee
v.
David L. LADD, Commissioner of Patents, Appellee
16225.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Jun 29, 1961.
Mr. Edwin T. Bean, Jr., Buffalo, N. Y., with whom Mr. Franklin D. Wolffe, Washington, D. C., was on the brief for appellant., Mr. Raymond E. Martin, Attorney, United States Patent Office, with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Solicitor, United States Patent Office, was on the brief for appellee.
Edgerton, Washington, Burger.
Published
PER CURIAM.
This is a patent case, under 35 U.S.C. § 145. Plaintiff-appellant’s application, Serial No. 333,147, covered a marked pharmaceutical tablet and the process of marking such a tablet. Though the plaintiff seems to have met a business need, and his process has achieved financial success, we are not convinced that the Patent Office and the District Court were wrong in holding that the application did not disclose patentable invention over the prior art. See Schafer v. Watson, 1961, 109 U.S.App.D.C. 360, 288 F.2d 144.
Affirmed.