Western Electric Co. v. Pacent Reproducer Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Bill of complaint filed by three plaintiffs, the appellants here, charging defendants with infringement of patents. A motion to dismiss for misjoinder of parties was granted, with leave to the plaintiffs to amend within twenty days, and, no amendment having been filed within the time limited, a final order of dismissal was thereafter entered. Reversed. The patents in suit are owned by the appellant American Telephone and Telegraph Company.
Read the full summary
Bill of complaint filed by three plaintiffs, the appellants here, charging defendants with infringement of patents. A motion to dismiss for misjoinder of parties was granted, with leave to the plaintiffs to amend within twenty days, and, no amendment having been filed within the time limited, a final order of dismissal was thereafter entered. Reversed. The patents in suit are owned by the appellant American Telephone and Telegraph Company. It had granted to the other two appellants nonexclusive licenses (the exact terms of which are not set forth) within a special field of use, and…
1Opinion of the CourtSwan, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
After dismissal of the previous appeal, reported in (C. C. A.) 37 F.(2d) 14, the District Court entered the final order of dismissal, which is now before us. The sole question presented is whether the two licensees should have been permitted to join as co-plaintiffs with the patent owner. The appellants rely upon Equity Rule 37 (28 US CA § 723, p. 20) and the acknowledged principle that an “exclusive licensee” is a proper party to join with the patent owner in an equity suit for infringement.
It is conceded that a bare license to practice a patented invention…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Waterman v. MacKenzieSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Gayler v. WilderSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Crown Die & Tool Co. v. Nye Tool & MacHine WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Birdsell v. ShaliolSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by86 opinions
- Rite-Hite Corp. v. Kelley Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Textile Productions, Inc. v. Mead Corporation and Fiber Trim Sewing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- I.A.E., Inc. v. ShaverCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- Davis v. BligeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Harris v. Emus Records Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.