Anderson v. United States

Federal Circuit

Anderson v. United States

16 F.3d 421, 1993 WL 525883

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Anderson v. United States. Read the opinion of the Court — 929 F.2d 648 →

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit·Decided December 14, 1993·No. 92-5168·Published

Opinion

16 F.3d 421
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issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.

John E. ANDERSON, Richard S. Baker, Willie Barnes, Lawrence
Howell Barr, Harry R. Beech, Terrance Bigley, Donald
Crabtree, Donald E. Gallagher, Robert W. Harry, Robert
Heygster, Jerry L. Hudson, Sr., Roscoe M. Hutzell, Dennis R.
Jacobs, Rolland Johnson, George William King, Jr., Lawrence
F. Luckel, Neil E. McGarry, David M. Matvay, James Irving
Purnell, Michael J. Reilly, James H. Salter, Anthony E.
Santilli, Haig Scott, John W. Smith, Joseph Lawrence
Sullivan, Percy G. Sussex, Guy E. Tavel, Herbert C.
Wheelock, Jr., Ramon I. Ayalo, Mark Bartels, Joseph A.
Bongiorno, Mark J. Gleason, Doug Leo Vincent Goodwin, Walter
Hansborough, Jr., Eugene M. Hickey, John Hines, Milt A.
Herzing, Carolyn D. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-5168.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 14, 1993.

DISMISSED.

ORDER

The parties having so agreed, it is

ORDERED that the proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed.R.App.P. 42(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

16 F.3d 421
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issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.

John E. ANDERSON, Richard S. Baker, Willie Barnes, Lawrence
Howell Barr, Harry R. Beech, Terrance Bigley, Donald
Crabtree, Donald E. Gallagher, Robert W. Harry, Robert
Heygster, Jerry L. Hudson, Sr., Roscoe M. Hutzell, Dennis R.
Jacobs, Rolland Johnson, George William King, Jr., Lawrence
F. Luckel, Neil E. McGarry, David M. Matvay, James Irving
Purnell, Michael J. Reilly, James H. Salter, Anthony E.
Santilli, Haig Scott, John W. Smith, Joseph Lawrence
Sullivan, Percy G. Sussex, Guy E. Tavel, Herbert C.
Wheelock, Jr., Ramon I. Ayalo, Mark Bartels, Joseph A.
Bongiorno, Mark J. Gleason, Doug Leo Vincent Goodwin, Walter
Hansborough, Jr., Eugene M. Hickey, John Hines, Milt A.
Herzing, Carolyn D. Jackson, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
The UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 92-5168.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Dec. 14, 1993.

DISMISSED.

ORDER

The parties having so agreed, it is

ORDERED that the proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed.R.App.P. 42(b).

Anderson v. United States, 16 F.3d 421, 1993 WL 525883 (Fed. Cir. 1993).

Pincite

16 F.3d 421 (Anderson v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.