cited Cited "see" David Robinson v. Sally Jewell See 3 F.2d 90 (D.C.Cir.1925), aff'd per curiam, 271 U.S. 643 , 46 S.Ct. 481 , 70 L.Ed. 1128 (1926).

discussed Cited "see" Robinson v. Salazar On May 9, 1863, a patent from the United States was issued conveying to Mexican grantees the land, which includes the Indian tract.”); see Super v. Work, 3 F.2d 90, 91 (C.E.D.1925) (.Non-mission Indians who are “merely roving bands” were required to present their claims to the claims commission), aff'd, 271 U.S. 643 , 46 S.Ct. 481 , 70 L.Ed. 1128 (1926).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Robinson v. Salazar See also Super v. Work, 149, 3 F.2d 90 (1925), affirmed by Super v. Work, 271 U.S. 643 , 46 S.Ct. 481 , 70 L.Ed. 1128 (1926) (roving bands of Indians, who were not Mission Indians, did not make claim under the act of 1851, and they must therefore be treated as having lost, through abandonment, any claim which they may have had.) Thus, case law holds that aboriginal title is lost when land patents are validly issued to predecessors in title.