James H. Evans v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 14 F.3d 613 (Fed. Cir. 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
James H. Evans v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 14 F.3d 613 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Osborn v. United States (uscfc, 2000-06-30)
Treatment trajectory · 1993 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1993 2009 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Osborn v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Maniere v. United States, 31 Fed.Cl. 410, 415 (1994) (citing Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 61 , aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.Cir.1993), cert. denied, [511] U.S. [1010], 114 S.Ct. 1382 , 128 L.Ed.2d 57 (1994)).
cited Cited "see" Chandler v. States
Fed. Cl. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Maniere v. United States, 31 Fed.Cl. 410, 415 (1994) (citing Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 61 , aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 , 1993 WL 481139 (Fed.
discussed Cited "see" Sanford v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 1994 · signal: see · confidence high
See Maniere v. United States, 31 Fed.Cl. 410,415 (1994) (citing Messerschimdt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 61 , aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.Cir.1993), cert, denied, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1382 , 128 L.Ed.2d 57 (1994)).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fastship, LLC v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2017 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 17-40 (granting the government’s cross-motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs patent infringement suit and invalidating plaintiffs patent on the basis of anticipation and obviousness), aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Hitkansut LLC v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2017 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 17-40 (1993), (granting the government’s cross-motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs patent infringement suit and invalidating plaintiffs patent on the basis of anticipation and obviousness), aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2014 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1, 18-40, aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.Cir.1993) (holding that patent was invalid for lack of novelty and for obviousness, addressing an infringement claim brought under Section 1498(a)).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Thomas v. United States
Fed. Cl. · 2003 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Messerschmidt v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 1 , 10 n. 2 (1993), aff'd, 14 F.3d 613 (Fed.Cir.1993) (Table) (noting that in an earlier proceeding the court had determined that because this court is not a court of the United States (an Article III court), "it was .not technically authorized to exercise the functions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (1988), which provides for the appointment of counsel”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
James H. Evans
v.
Office of Personnel Management
94-3024.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Nov 22, 1993.
14 F.3d 613
Published

14 F.3d 613
NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.6(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.

James H. EVANS, Petitioner,
v.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent.

No. 94-3024.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Nov. 22, 1993.

MSPB

1

DISMISSED.

ORDER

2

The petitioner having failed to pay the docketing fee required by Federal Circuit Rule 52(a)(1) and to file the required Statement Concerning Discrimination, it is

3

ORDERED that the petition for review be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.