Case Name: UNIVERSAL MOTOR TRUCK COMPANY v. UNIVERSAL MOTOR COMPANY
Court: Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1913-12-01
Citations: 41 App. D.C. 261
Docket Number: No. 411
Parties: UNIVERSAL MOTOR TRUCK COMPANY v. UNIVERSAL MOTOR COMPANY.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of Cases Adjudged in the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia
Volume: 41
Pages: 261–262

Head Matter:
UNIVERSAL MOTOR TRUCK COMPANY v. UNIVERSAL MOTOR COMPANY.
Appeal and Error; Patents; Interlocutory Decision; Certiorari.
1. This court has no power to grant a special appeal from an interlocutory decision of the Commissioner of Patents.
2. The grant of a writ of certiorari, being the function of a court of original jurisdiction, is not within the power of this court.
No. 411.
Original Docket.
Submitted November 18, 1913.
Decided December 1, 1913.
Petition for a special appeal or certiorari from an interlocutory decision of the Commissioner of Patents.
Dismissed.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Mr. Frank 8. Appleman for the petition.
No appearance in opposition.

Opinion:
Mr. Chief Justice Siiepaed
delivered the opinion of the Court:
This is an application for appeal by the Universal Motor Company from an interlocutory decision of the Commissioner of Patents.
The litigation in the Patent Office is between the applicant for, and the opposer of, the registration of a trademark.
Appeals .from interlocutory orders of the supreme court of the District of Columbia may, by special provision of sec. 7 of the act organizing this court, be allowed from interlocutory orders; but no such provision is to be found in sec. 9, which confers appellate jurisdiction over the Patent Commissioner. Only final decisions of the Commissioner of Patents in certain cases can be appealed.
Failing the power to grant an appeal, the applicant prays for a writ of certiorari. The grant of a writ of certiorariis the function of a court of original jurisdiction, when its purpose is to obtain review of a final order of an inferior tribunal acting in a judicial capacity in a particular case. And in such cases, when allowable at all, there must be no other remedy. Digge v. Hitchcock, 229 U. S. 162, 171, 57 L. ed. 1135, 1137, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 639.
This court has only appellate jurisdiction in such cases. The petition is dismissed. Dismissed.