Frasch v. Moore

Background

An inventor applied for a patent and the Commissioner of Patents required changes to how the applicant divided claims. The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reviewed that ruling and returned a certificate sending the matter back to the Patent Office to proceed under its construction of the rule on division of claims. The disputed action was interlocutory and did not produce a final judicial judgment in the case.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Supreme Court could review a Court of Appeals decision that only certified a ruling to the Patent Office instead of issuing a final judgment. The Court examined the statute of February 9, 1893, and Revised Statutes §§780, 4914, and 4915, and concluded that the Court of Appeals’ review in such patent matters is summary and limited, and its certificate governs only the Patent Office’s further proceedings. Because that decision does not preclude later challenges and is not a final judgment, the statutory path for Supreme Court review under §8 did not apply. The Court therefore dismissed the appeal and writ of error and denied certiorari.

Real world impact

The ruling narrows when the Supreme Court will hear patent disputes: only final judgments or statutorily specified cases qualify for review. Patent applicants who receive interlocutory certificates from the Court of Appeals must follow the Patent Office’s instructions or pursue a final decision through the equity process provided in §4915. This opinion resolves a procedural question and does not decide the underlying patent validity.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices White and McKenna dissented and would have allowed review, indicating disagreement about whether this Court should hear such interlocutory patent matters.