Case Name: The Master, Warden, Searchers, Assistants and Commonalty of The Co. of Cutlers in Hallamshire in the County of York v. Sheffield Steel Corp.
Court: United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1954-06-30
Citations: 42 C.C.P.A. 726
Docket Number: No. 6152
Parties: The Master, Warden, Searchers, Assistants and Commonalty of The Co. of Cutlers in Hallamshire in the County of York v. Sheffield Steel Corp.
Judges: Before O’Connell, Johnson, Worley, and Cole, Associate Judges
Reporter: Court of Customs and Patent Appeals Reports
Volume: 42
Pages: 726–732

Head Matter:
215 F. (2d) 285; 103 USPQ 54
The Master, Warden, Searchers, Assistants and Commonalty of The Co. of Cutlers in Hallamshire in the County of York v. Sheffield Steel Corp.
(No. 6152)
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals,
June 30,1954
Ohauneey P. Carter for appellant.
Alfred R. Fuehs for appellee.
Before O’Connell, Johnson, Worley, and Cole, Associate Judges

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
This is an appeal from the decision of the Assistant Commissioner of Patents reversing and remanding the decision of the Examiner of Interferences, granting appellants' motion for summary judgment. Appellee has here moved to dismiss said appeal on the grounds that the decision appealed from is an interlocutory decision and therefore, not appealable.
The decision of the Assistant Commissioner of Patents is essentially an order denying a motion for summary judgment. An order denying a motion for. summary judgment is an interlocutory order, and as such is not a proper order for appeal. Marcus Breier Sons, Inc. v. Marvlo Fabrics, Inc., 173 F. (2d) 29, 80 USPQ 534. Since this is not a final judgment no appeal can be taken. "A 'final decision' generally is one which ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment." Gatlin v. United States, 324 U. S. 229, 233, and cases therein cited. The reason for not allowing appeals from such judgments is to prevent piecemeal litigation. Catlin v. United States, supra.
For the reasons hereinbefore stated, the motion is granted and the appeal is dismissed.