Richmond Screw Anchor Co. v. United States

Background

A company that bought a patent for a new, much lighter cargo beam sued to recover for the Government’s use of that beam. The inventor, Melchior Lenke, had replaced heavy, riveted channel beams with a single swinging I-beam that cut weight and became widely used. The Court of Claims first found the company entitled to recover, but on a second hearing it dismissed the claim based on an old rule that voids assignments of claims against the United States unless strict formalities are followed. The record showed 810 of the Lenke beams were installed by January 1, 1919, and the patent had been assigned to the company after that date.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the old anti-assignment rule (section 3477) prevents an assignee from pursuing the special remedy Congress provided in a 1918 law. That 1918 law let patent owners sue the United States in the Court of Claims for use or manufacture of a patented invention, and it aimed to protect contractors from private suits while making the Government responsible. The Court concluded that, so far as the 1918 law removed the owner’s remedy against the contractor and substituted a remedy against the United States, section 3477 should not be applied to defeat assignments. To avoid raising serious constitutional doubts and to carry out Congress’s wartime purpose, the Court reversed and sent the case back for more fact-finding about how many beams were installed after July 1, 1918, and what a reasonable royalty would be.

Real world impact

The ruling lets patent owners pursue compensation from the Government for covered uses after the 1918 law and leaves contractors protected from private infringement suits; the amount of recovery must still be determined on remand.