Legal Opinion · Dissent

Application of Rudolf Wiechert

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 19, 1967No. Patent Appeal 7636Published

1DissentSmith, Judge

The majority opinion of this court rests on the novel concept that an Article III Federal Court does not have jurisdiction to inquire into the legality of an administrative quasi-judicial board whose decision it has been requested to review. This concept is unsupported by authority or precedent and seems to me to be lacking in both reason and logic. The power to inquire into the legality of such a board is a necessary and inherent power of the reviewing court. Such power is the court’s only safeguard against putting its judicial imprimatur on a legal nullity. Our obligation is to dispose of…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. United States v. American Trucking AssociationsSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. United States v. L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Chicot County Drainage District v. Baxter State BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  5. Norton v. Shelby CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1886

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API