Court cases Columbia

Court action was instigated by the industry in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit( ). Meanwhile, AFL-CIO also entered suit against the Department of Labor in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, claiming that the final rule was too lax( ). All court actions eventually were consolidated in one case in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (10). 

District of Columbia, in 1957, in the case of Isenstead v. Watson (8), setting forth that the Patent Office should be very careful, and perhaps even reluctant, to grant a patent on a new medical formula until it has been thoroughly tested and successfully tried by more than one physician. However, we find a rather different point of view expressed by the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (10), which held ... 

II) the Administrator issues such an order respecting such substance but such order does not take effect because objections were filed under paragraph (I)(C) with respect to it, the Administrator, through attorneys of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall apply to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia or the United States district court for the judicial district in which the manufacturer or processor, as the case may be, of such substance is found, resides, or transacts business for an injunction to prohibit or limit the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal of such substance (or to prohibit or limit any combination of such activities). 

AFL-CIO unions petitioned for review of AEC dedsion in the PRDC case before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. 

---