Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/929

 BTAN V. LPE. 917 �Eyan V. Lbb.* �(Circuit Court, B. D. Missouri. March 22, 1882. ) �1. CmcniT CollBT—JcRisDiCTiON— Patents— Assionmbnts—Rev. St. j{ 629,4898. Where A. brought a suit in equity in a circuit court of the United States, and alleged in liis bill that he had recovered a judgment against B., the defend- ant, in a State court for $52; that an execution had been issued ; that the judg- ment remained unsatisfied ; that B, had no property in the state subject to execution, but was the owner of certain letters patent issued to him by the government of the United States, and prayed the court to order B.'s interest in the patented invention sold, and the proceeds applied to the payment of said judgment, — hM, that the case was not a suit " arising under the patent laws," within the meaning of section 629 of the Rev. St., and that the court had no jurisdiction. �In Equity. �The complainant alleged in his bill that he had recovered a judg- ment against the defendant, in a suit before a justice of the peace of the city of St. Louis, for the sum of $52 and costs; that execution had been issued, but that no property had been found subject thereto ; that it was wholly fruitless; that the defendant owned no property subject to execution issued by any court of the state of Missouri ; that said judgment and costs remained wholly unpaid, and that noth- ing oould be recovered thereon through the ordinary processes of law; that the defendant was the inventor of a certain machine, for which he had obtained letters patent from the government of the United States, which he still owned. The bill closed with a prayer that the court might grant an order directing that all the interest of the defendant in and to said letters patent might be sold, and that the proceeds of the sale be applied towards the payment of said judg- ment and the costs of this suit; that the defendant be ordered to make an assignment in writing of his interest in said invention to the purchaser at sueh sale, and that in case he refused to comply with the order of the court a trustee might be appointed with full power for, and instead of, the defendant, to make an assignment to the purchaser at such sale; and that a preliminary injunction might be granted to restrain the defendant from disposing of said patent dur- ing the pendency of the suit. Shortly after the filing of the bill the complainant moved the court to grant his prayer for a preliminary injunction. It was contended in his behalf that the court had juris- diction of the suit under sections 629 and 4898, Eev. St., which �•Reported by B. P. Rex, Esq., of the St. Louis bar. ��� �