Bob O. Burson v. Thomas F. Carmichael

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “There is no support in law for repeated bites at the apple. On the contrary, the law whenever possible reaches for repose.”
• “There is no support in law for repeated bites at the apple. On the contrary, the law whenever possible reaches for repose.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Peter J. Degeorge v. Donald R. Bernier
  Federal Circuit· 1985-07-19· cited 75×
• Yuichi Kubota and Ako Watanabe v. Yoshiyuki Shibuya, Shigeo Daimon and Kazuo Okamura
  Federal Circuit· 1993-07-08· cited 26×
• Albert R. Martin v. Ferdy P. Mayer
  Federal Circuit· 1987-06-30· cited 22×
• In Re Construction Equipment Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-12-08· cited 16×
• RE Phelon Co., Inc. v. Wabash, Inc.
  N.D. Indiana· 1986-07-09· cited 3×
• Heil Co. v. Snyder Industries, Inc.
  D. Nebraska· 1991-04-19· cited 3×
• Jordan v. Brown
  Veterans Claims· 1995-12-01· cited 2×
• In Re Construction Equipment Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-12-15

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Ceramco, Inc. v. Lee Pharmaceuticals
  Second Circuit· 1975-01-30· cited 85×
• Silvestri v. Grant
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1974-05-09· cited 26×
• Robert A. Reiners v. Charles L. Mehltretter
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1956-09-27· cited 17×
• Snitzer v. Etzel
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1976-04-08· cited 11×
• Loy W. Sockman and Elliott W. Brady v. Robert C. Switzer and Richard A. Ward
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1967-06-22· cited 8×
• Harold R. Miller v. Ronald R. House, and Yun Jen
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1966-02-17· cited 4×