explaining that § 316 of the Tariff Act of 1922 “was the prototype of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and is, in substance, the same”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that § 316 of the Tariff Act of 1922 “was the prototype of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and is, in substance, the same”
- “It has long been settled that articles patented in the United States cannot be manufactured abroad, imported, and sold in violation of the rights of the patentee.”
- “This is substantial evidence that, at the time of the acts complained of by the complainant, the Orion Company was an importer or consignee of slide fasteners.”
- Section 337’s prohibition on “unfair methods of competition in the importation of goods is broad enough to prevent every type and form of unfair practice”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
GARRETT, Associate Judge
(specially concurring).
I am compelled, as a matter of reason, to agree that the doctrine upheld by the majority in the ease of Re Frischer & Co., Inc., et al. v. United States, 17 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 494, T. D. 43964 (to which I respectfully dissented), is controlling of the issue presented in the instant case. I do not, however, agree to all forms of expression, nor to all assertions of the present majority opinion. I shall not attempt the fruitless task of detailing the matters upon which I disagree, since in the main they are matters of form rather than of substance.
I do feel impelled to state that, in my judgment, the issues before us do not require any declaration by us asi to the duty of the ■ President in the event some court of competent jurisdiction declares invalid a patent upon which an embarg-o has been predicated. Our jurisdiction under section 337 (19 USCA § 1337) extends alone to a review of the report of the Tariff Commission, and that upon questions of law only, and we have nothing to do in the instant proceeding with defining the President’s duties. Under the section the President may act upon the report of the Tariff Commission, or he may act independently of it. I am unable to see wherein it is incumbent upon this court, under the limited duty which the statute devolves upon it, to essay a declaration as to what the duty of the Executive may be under some possible future condition.