TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

The United States of America v. Dubilier Condenser Corporation

The United States v. Dubilier Condenser Corp., 289 U.S. 706 (1933)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
May 29, 1933
Docket
No. 316
Citations
289 U.S. 706

Opinion

289 U.S. 706 53 S.Ct. 687 77 L.Ed. 1462

The UNITED STATES of America, petitioner, v. DUBILIER CONDENSER CORPORATION.

No. 316.

The UNITED STATES of America, petitioner,

v.

DUBILIER CONDENSER CORPORATION.

No. 317.

The UNITED STATES of America, petitioner,

v.

DUBILIER CONDENSER CORPORATION.

No. 318.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 8, 1933

Messrs. Thomas D. Thacher, Sol. Gen., of Washington, D. C., Charles B. Rugg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Alexander Holtzoff, Sp. Asst. to Atty. Gen., Paul D. Miller, of Washington, D. C., and H. Brian Holland, of Philadelphia, Pa., for the United States.

Messrs. James H. Hughes, Jr., and E. Ennalls Berl, both of Wilmington, Del. (Messrs. Ward & Gray, of Wilmington, Del., and John B. Brady, of Washington, D. C., of counsel), for respondent.

1

For opinion below, see 59 F.(2d) 381 .

2

Ordered that the opinion in this case ( 289 U. S. 178 , 53 S. Ct. 554 , 77 L. Ed. ——) be amended as follows:

By striking out the following paragraph:

3

'Moreover no court could, however clear the proof of such a contract, order the execution of an assignment. No act of Congress has been called to our attention authorizing the United States to take a patent or to hold one by assignment. No statutory authority exists for the transfer of a patent to any department or officer of the Government, or for the administration of patents, or the issuance of licenses on behalf of the United States. In these circumstances no publi policy requires us to deprive the inventor of his exclusive rights as respects the general public and to lodge them in a dead hand incapable of turning the patent to account for the benefit of the public.' 4

now appearing on page 12 of said opinion.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1993: 119932026peak 1993 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Liggett Group, Inc. v. Sunas437 S.E.2d 674 (N.C. Ct. App. 1993)

Most recent

  1. Liggett Group, Inc. v. Sunas437 S.E.2d 674 (N.C. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Dubilier Condenser Corp, 289 U.S. 178 (1933) 207
C. M. Patten & Co. v. United States, 289 U.S. 705 (1933) 14
United States v. Dubilier Condenser Corp., 59 F.2d 381 (3d Cir. 1932) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list