172, 74 L.Ed.2d 141 (1982). The law is clear that Article I courts and administrative bodies may adjudicate any case involving public rights. The Supreme Court has held that: [a]t least in cases in which “public rights” are being litigated- — e.g., cases in which the Government is sued in its sovereign capacity to enforce public rights created by statutes within the power of Congress to enact — the Seventh Amendment does not prohibit Congress from assigning the fact-finding function and initial adjudication to an administrative forum with which the jury would be incompatible. Atlas Roofing Co., Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Comm’n, 430 U.S. 442, 450, 97 S.Ct. 1261, 1266, 51 L.Ed.2d 464 (1977). See also Joy Technologies, Inc. v. Manbeck, 959 F.2d 226, 228 (Fed.Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, administrative adjudication in
holding that seventh amendment right to jury trial not violated by courts dismissal for lack of jurisdiction holding that cases involving public rights may constitutionally be adjudicated by legislative courts and administrative agencies without implicating the seventh amendment right to a jury trial holding defendant to a preference action has a right to a jury trial pursuant to the seventh amendment of the united states constitution but that right can be waived by filing a claim in the bankruptcy proceedings holding that the courts grant of summary judgment did not violate the plaintiffs seventh amendment right to a jury trial and describing the plaintiffs argument that it did as very misleading holding that seventh amendment right to jury trial not violated by courts dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to rule 12b6 because as a matter of law complaint faded to present an issue for trial