Blank face

Of course the irregularity of the different lines, forming curves etc. exclude that we are looking at knots or branches here. Similar to my examples (though they were reative simple instruments) the Haselfichte/Bear claw figure can cause interesting 3D effects like diagonal waves, crosses or other patterns, so that Bill for example assumed a rough or wavey surface by the photo though it was perfectly smooth. The name doesn't refer to the plant Hasel or hazel but to the German word "Hagel" = hail, the saying goes that people formerly assumed that the figure was caused when a tree was heavily hit by a hail storm deforming the grain - or a bear leaving deep scratches with it's claws.

Good question. It's more than twelve years gone now. The roughness is just an impression of the photo, caused by the "claws" and dying of the wooden ground, otherwise it was smooth and neatly made with a nice scroll (s.photo) and a nailed-on neck (beside that the purfling was painted on). I assumed it to be Austrian/Bohemian (was bought from there), but not Salzkammergut due to the nailed neck.

Even to say it's for anybody's benefit would be dangerous (bienfait).

The case?

If you're referring to Haselfichte (Bear claw) it's different. These "Hazels" aren't caused by knots or branches but are specifications in the wood. The reason for this phenomena is discussed, maybe just genetic. Example of Haselfichte (first especially at the bass side):

Both look IMO more like 19th century Markneukirchen region violins to me. I don't think that there enough reference examples existing to make somebody able to write a reliable certificate, though there are surely some doing this nonetheless. Real mid 18th century Markneukirchens are a very rare thing because the production was rather small in comparison to later periods, but reprints of such labels like JF Glier 1760 were produced since the early 1800 and widely used to sign all sort of instruments.

Lots of fancy and unsupported myths out there.

The point is more that it just can't be judged by photos being over/underexposured, heavily processed and leaving everything of importance in shadows or unfocussed. Mittenwald and French outlines of the 18th/early 19th century can look very similar, also f-holes. A Mittenwald violin I would expect to have the purfing going longer to the end of the corners, but there are also exceptions. By which features one should be able to tell if the scroll belongs or doesn't by what's visible is also beyond my understanding, except guesswork.

I can't see that there's any proof for a former ownership at the Sheppard listing, too. So it could have been come into the auction by any random accident. Maybe it was once owned by the kid of a servant who forgot it in the house due to it's neglectible value. One needs to know that the "Aubert" branded bridge blanks were massproduced and sold relative cheaply as supply for luthiers or anybody else from ca. mid 20th century onwards, in Germany by the GEWA firm, and can be found at literally millions of violins of all kind, but usually student instruments. In particular these with the moveable feet can be set on every violin within some minutes. Nonetheless you can find as many Ebay or other uninformed listings claiming them as "Aubert Mirecourt violin". Obviously it's nothing to do about this than to give informations again and again. The liveauctioneer "example" is as nonsensical as any other of this kind. There was a French maker Aubert in Troyes (mind not in Mirecourt) in the 18th century. Of course an 18th century bridge would look quite different from the modern type bearing this brand, and Aubert is just a name like Miller or Myer.

The only significant value might lie in the alleged former ownership. The violin itself is a very simple Markneukirchen/Schönbach trade violin, more probably from the early 20th century, the Aubert Mirecourt brand at the (surely later added) bridge is just a trade mark of a bridge supply company. The listing doesn't offer any prove that this particular violin was really owned by the guy.

Very common practice at lower grade Mirecourt bows around 1900.

But it's not clear if they meant case or violin (or the place where both were put together). Usually not many are reading this item specifics btw.

I'm wondering if varnish and decorations are later alterations?

If this is somewhat 1820/30/40, might be. Now the total belly and ff shape reminds me of a sort of Mathieu. Just the scroll is so close to some mid 19th Schönbach rough and ready style...

With the "old French" method the rib joints look from outside similar mitred as with inside or outside mould; they weren't clamped together by the ends but glued to the block surfaces. Very often the corner blocks are longer in the C ribs and the linings either cut off or the tips glued over the blocks. The linked threads are showing some examples. Outside mould is often recognized by a small gap inside of the joint (visible only when the box is opened, s. photo). @martin swan: Though I see your point, I can find many close similarities between the Chappuy and the OP. Corners, bouts, shading of the varnish etc. are quite different, had it an original scroll? The ff OP look to me like any of the average Mirecourt/Caussin school ff. Unfortunately we don't have a total view of the belly. Reg. the neck, the OP could remove the fingerboard to see if there's an additional piece of wood glued to the neck end, though this could be also original and just there due to a too short neck log.