Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co., 284 U.S. 448 (1932)

Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 284 U.S. 444, click here.

Leman v. Krentler-Arnold Hinge Last Co.


No. 332


Argued January 13, 14, 1932
Decided February 15, 1932
284 U.S. 448

CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

Syllabus

1. One who sues in a federal court of equity to enjoin infringement of his patent thereby submits himself to the jurisdiction of that court with respect to all the issues in the case, including those pertaining to a counterclaim praying that he be restrained from infringing the like patent of the defendant. P. 451.

2. A decree of the District Court perpetually enjoining a party from infringing a patent binds him personally and continuously throughout the United States, and his disobedience of the prohibition is a contempt even though committed outside of the district of the court. Id.

3. A court which has permanently enjoined a party from infringing a patent retains jurisdiction to enforce obedience through civil contempt proceedings. P. 452.

4. The civil contempt proceeding is part of the main cause. Id.

5. Service of process for the purpose of bringing the respondent within the jurisdiction of the court is therefore unnecessary in the contempt proceeding; actual notice of that proceeding suffices, as where the respondent appeared for the purpose of objecting to the jurisdiction upon the ground that he had not been brought in by process, and upon the overruling of the objection, contested his liability. P. 454.

6. While the distinction is clear between damages to a patent owner, in the sense of actual pecuniary loss resulting from infringement, and the profits made by the infringer, the profits are within the concept of compensatory relief, and are allowed in equity as an equitable measure of compensation. P. 455.

7. The profits resulting from an infringement of a patent committed in violation of an injunction are recoverable by the injured party in a civil proceeding for contempt. P. 457.

50 F.2d 699, 707, reversed.

District Court affirmed.

Certiorari to review a decree reversing a decree entered against the present respondent by the District Court in a contempt proceeding for violation of an injunction against infringement of a patent. The court below sustained the jurisdiction but held that profits and certain expenses were not allowable in this proceeding by way of compensation. See also 13 F.2d 796; 24 id. 423.