Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 20.pdf/658

 DILATORY PATENT PROCEDURE the consideration furnished by the patentees. They should not be permitted to consume the time of the court or impose on it and defendants the burden and expense of patent litigation." This view finds support in Atlantic Works v. Brady, 107 U. S. 200. From a somewhat careful consideration, I feel that the remedial procedure which I have outlined herein of limiting the num ber of appeals at the Patent Office, and providing a thoroughly competent tribunal of Patent Office appeals with plenary juris diction and powers, would be exceedingly beneficial in cutting down the large number of trifling patents issued; particularly if the courts of our country see fit to grant tem porary injunctions on patents passed upon by this tribunal, where the case of infringe ment is clear, and unless there is very clear evidence that the same device as called for by the patent has been disclosed fully in the prior art.

507

Such a procedure would remedy, to a very large extent, "the unsatisfactory and con stantly changing condition of the law and practice as to temporary injunctions and appeals therefrom and the variance in its application in different circuits of the United States." If the plan last year endorsed by the Com mittee on Patent Law of the Americaji Bar Association for a single court of last resort in patent causes which should consist of judges chosen by the Supreme Court from judges of the various circuits, to hold tenure during a certain period of time should be enacted, the patentee could receive speedy action on the merits of his patent, and we would also have a uniformity of practice in regard to the grant of temporary injunc tions based on the procedure of the Patent Office outlined herein. DBS MOINES, IA., August, 1908.