Document: 331 U.S. 96 67 S.Ct. 1165 91 L.Ed. 1365 McCULLOUGHv.KAMMERER CORPORATION et al. No. 755. Argued April 8, 1947. Decided 28, Mr. A. William Boyken, of San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner. Leonard S. Lyon, Los Angeles, respondent. Justice LACK deliv ered the opinion Court. 1 In an earlier phase this patent infringement suit a owned by respondent Kammerer was held valid and infringed An accounting profits damages ordered. D.C., 39 F.Supp. 213. The Circuit Court Appeals affirmed. 9 Cir., 138 F.2d 482. We granted certiorari to consider whether license greement between respondents Baash-Ross contained restrictions which were contrary public policy unlawful so as bar recovery against On oral argument case here it developed that no findings fact had been made District on issue, nor question presented or passed Appeals. therefore dismissed writ certiorari. 323 327, 65 297, 89 273. 2 remand, did not disturb its original affirmance Court's holding infringed. But motion petitioner, court amended judgment authorize 'entertain motions * modify set aside order orders accountings thereof, take such action may determine' concerning petitioner's contention respondents' use should all infringement. 148 525, 526. Thereafter petitioner in he alleged had, interest, used restrain trade, fix prices, suppress competition. Relying these allegations, asked stay render final dismissing complaint ground illegally misused patent. Without introducing further evidence both parties submitted facts already record. After argument, extensive concluded his defense established, entered denying enter complaint. appeal from disposition 'not decree, othewise.' 156 343, 345. hold erroneously dismissed. 3 Act February 1927, 44 Stat. 1261, 28 U.S.C. § 227a, U.S.C.A. provides 'when any equity letters inventions, decree is rendered except ordering accounting, be taken circuit appeals *.' object 1927 amendment 129 Judicial Code make sure could suits without being compelled await accounting. reports Congressional committees measure called attention large expenses frequently involved losses incurred where recoveries ultimately denied reversal decrees merits.1 And see Brick v. I. Namm & Sons, Inc., 21 179. It reason Congress authorized departure type usual practice under are allowed disposes phases controversy. See Catlin United States, 324 U.S.229, 233, 631, 911. 4 Nor do unusual circumstances less appealable. Whether would have authority own reopen proceedings misuse patent, Marconi Wireless Telegraph Co. 320 U.S.1, 47, 48, 63 1393, 1414, 1415, 87 1731, proper after did. reopening case, gave full consideration decided upon merits. Bowman Loperena, 311 262, 61 201, 85 177. There then nothing remained done conduct Therefore, resulting falls squarely within amended. designated 'order' rather than 'decree' crucial significance. Rule 54, Rules Civil Procedure.2 For though 'order,' binding effect disposing before same entitled 'decree.' non-appealable because one taken, more first reversed toto reversal. Since dismissal claim is, meaning 129, 'final accounting,' 5 Reversed. House Committee Patents expressed belief legislation 'is needed prevent great burden expense litigants actions determine validity patents, involved. Under present procedure interlocutory upholding but until has court. bill uch can obviate cost event appeal.' H.R.Rep.No.1890, 69th Cong., 2d Sess. (1927). Senate emphasized incident conducting merits determined appeal. apparently went assumption prior injunction wanted permit there effective outstanding not, even expired making inappropriate continued violation. Sen.Rep.No.1319, This presents precise situation thought designed avoid happens expired. indicate purpose whenever everything accomplished. "Judgment' rules includes lies.' Federal Procedure, following section 723c.

Category: 8