Lange v. Commissioner of Patents

District of Columbia

Lange v. Commissioner of Patents

352 F. Supp. 116, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 162, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10679

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedDecember 16, 1972

DocketCiv. A. No. 604-72

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 352 F. Supp. 116 (Lange v. Commissioner of Patents) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lange v. Commissioner of Patents, 352 F. Supp. 116, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 162, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10679 (D.D.C. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum, Opinion and Order

McGUIRE, District Judge.

The Commissioner of Patents, the defendant in this civil action arising under 35 U.S.C. § 145, has filed objections to plaintiff’s interrogatories and requests for admission by the defendant. They were filed August 16, 1972 and the objections on November 22,1972.

Plaintiff seeks mostly information on matters pertaining exclusively to the internal management and operation of the Patent Office, and the qualification of its officers in a certain, specific, professional field.

Assuming arguendo permissibility of such requests, the Court finds such to be irrelevant in a proceeding under § 145. Specifically, and further, it suffices to say that any inquiry in the nature of a challenge to the scientific and professional qualifications of the Examiners-in-Chief cannot be entertained, since a fortiori they are “persons of competent legal knowledge and scientific ability” (35 U.S.C. § 7), who have been “appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,” (35 U.S.C. § 3) [emphasis supplied], and perform quasi-judicial functions, as do all other Examiners.¹

Therefore, any attempted probing by way of interrogatories and requests for admission into their mental processes and expertise or the lack of it in the making of rulings or arriving at conclusions is not open as an avenue of discovery, since theirs, in the circumstances, as has been stated, is an adjudicatory function.² Since this is a proceeding de novo, the Court is concerned only with the findings and conclusions of the Patent Office and any new evidence which may be presented at the trial of the cause, The objections, therefore, to interrogatories and requests for admission, in the circumstances, are sustained, and this memorandum may be regarded as an order to that effect.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Memorandum, Opinion and Order

McGUIRE, District Judge.

The Commissioner of Patents, the defendant in this civil action arising under 35 U.S.C. § 145, has filed objections to plaintiff’s interrogatories and requests for admission by the defendant. They were filed August 16, 1972 and the objections on November 22,1972.

Plaintiff seeks mostly information on matters pertaining exclusively to the internal management and operation of the Patent Office, and the qualification of its officers in a certain, specific, professional field.

Assuming arguendo permissibility of such requests, the Court finds such to be irrelevant in a proceeding under § 145. Specifically, and further, it suffices to say that any inquiry in the nature of a challenge to the scientific and professional qualifications of the Examiners-in-Chief cannot be entertained, since a fortiori they are “persons of competent legal knowledge and scientific ability” (35 U.S.C. § 7), who have been “appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,” (35 U.S.C. § 3) [emphasis supplied], and perform quasi-judicial functions, as do all other Examiners.¹

Therefore, any attempted probing by way of interrogatories and requests for admission into their mental processes and expertise or the lack of it in the making of rulings or arriving at conclusions is not open as an avenue of discovery, since theirs, in the circumstances, as has been stated, is an adjudicatory function.² Since this is a proceeding de novo, the Court is concerned only with the findings and conclusions of the Patent Office and any new evidence which may be presented at the trial of the cause, The objections, therefore, to interrogatories and requests for admission, in the circumstances, are sustained, and this memorandum may be regarded as an order to that effect.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

352 F. Supp. 116, 176 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 162, 1972 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lange-v-commissioner-of-patents-dcd-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack