Briggs v. United Shoe Machinery Co.,
239 U.S. 48 (1915)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Briggs v. United Shoe Machinery Co., 239 U.S. 48 (1915)

Briggs v. United Shoe Machinery Company

No. 638

Submitted October 12, 1915

Decided November 1, 1915

239 U.S. 48


A suit for royalties reserved upon the sale of a patent right is not a suit arising under the patent laws, and the district court does not have jurisdiction on that ground.

The bill in this case does not present a case in equity within §§ 4915 or 4918, Rev.Stat.

The general powers of the federal courts when sitting as courts of equity can only be exerted in cases otherwise within the jurisdiction of those courts as defined by Congress.

Only the United States can maintain a bill for the annulment of a patent on the ground of its procurement by fraud.

The facts, which involve the jurisdiction of the district court of the United States in cases arising under the patent laws, are stated in the opinion.

Page 239 U. S. 49

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.