ABSTRACT OF DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT IN COURT OF CLAIMS CASES RICHMOND SCREW ANCHOR CO. v. UNITED STATES [61 C. Cls. 397; 275 U. S. 331] Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. Upon certiorari the judgment was reversed, the Supreme Court deciding: 1. Patent No. 1,228,120, issued May 29, 1917, to Lenke for a cargo beam capable of moving on a horizontal axis so as to present its full strength in the line of stress, thus permitting the use of less metal than was required for the fixed beam of the prior art, and saving expense in installation-held valid. 2. Where two reasons are given in an opinion for the same decision, neither is obiter dictum. 3. Rev. Stat. § 3477, forbidding assignments of claims against the United States prior to allowance, liquidation and issuance of a warrant for payment, applied to claims for infringement of a patent. 4. The right to recover for past infringement of a patent by a private party is assignable with the patent. 5. Under the act of June 25, 1910, where a patented article was made for the United States by a contractor, unauthorized by the patent owner, and used by the United States, the patent owner had an assignable right of action for the infringement against the contractor; and a claim against the United States for reasonable compensation for the use, assertable in the Court of Claims, but subject to the provisions of Rev. Stats. 3477 forbidding assignments. 6. Under the act of July 1, 1918, which did away with the remedy against the contractor in such cases, and confined the patent owner to a suit against the United States in the Court of Claims for recovery of his reasonable and entire compensa761 66 Syllabus tion for such use and manufacture," the claim of the patent owner against the United States for manufacture and use occurring since the date of the act, is assignable with the patent, notwithstanding the sweeping terms of Rev. Stats. § 3477. 7. Federal statutes should be so construed as to avoid serious doubt of their constitutionality. 8. The special intent to prevent such assignments, deducible from the later statute and its history, though not expresed, must prevail over the broad general terms of the earlier one forbidding assignments. Mr. CHIEF JUSTICE TAFT delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court January 3, 1928. CASES DECIDED IN THE COURT OF CLAIMS FEBRUARY 21, 1928, TO MAY 31, 1928 INCLUSIVE, IN WHICH JUDGMENTS WERE RENDERED BUT NO OPINIONS DELIVERED No. D-538. FEBRUARY 21, 1928 Alfred J. Brooks. Failure and refusal to sell shipyard. Dismissed. No. F-1. FEBRUARY 27, 1928 Alester G. Alexander. Readjustment of retired pay, warrant officer, Army. Dis missed. No. B-144. MARCH 5, 1928 Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. Transportation of military impedimenta, Army. Dis missed. No. D-245. APRIL 2, 1928 Chicago & North Western Ry. Co. Transportation of troops, Army. Dismissed. Henry W. Ulmo. No. E-616. APRIL 2, 1928 Difference in pay, Officers' Training Camp. Dismissed. No. E-37. APRIL 2, 1928 Norfolk Awning & Tent Co. Contract for tents, War Department. Dismissed. 763 No. E-566. APRIL 2, 1928 Detroit, Toledo & Ironton R. R. Co. Transportation of oil, U. S. Shipping Board. Dismissed. No. D-849. APRIL 2, 1928 Leonard B. Zeisler, trustee. Contract for axes, War Department. Dismissed. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Ry. Co. John H. Coulter. No. D-1054. APRIL 16, 1928 Pay as candidate for commission, U. S. Army. Dismissed. No. E-477. APRIL 16, 1928 George W. Hutton. Pay as candidate for commission, U. S. Army. Dismissed. Henry J. Lucke. No. D-303. APRIL 16, 1928 Professional legal services. (See 60 C. Cls. 1031.) Dismissed. No. H-399. APRIL 23, 1928 Ernest Peter Vincent. Infringement of patents. Dismissed. Edward E. Wall. No. J-50. APRIL 23, 1928 Removal from postal service. Dismissed. |