Carrier Corp. v. United States

Carrier Corp. v. United States

Opinion

 [****56]   [*680]   [**246]  This case, before the court on defendant's motion for partial summary judgment, requires us to determine whether the alleged use of plaintiff's patented invention in the performance of a refuse collection contract was a use by or for the Government within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a). ¹ [***6]  Although this is, surprisingly, a case of first impression in this court, ² the legal issues presented have arisen in a number of patent infringement cases in other courts. ³

 [*681]  Plaintiff, Carrier Corporation, is successor in interest to Dempster Brothers, Inc., and is owner by assignment of patents relating to certain features of refuse compactors and containers. Although the Government's motion for partial [***7]  summary judgment is addressed solely to alleged infringement of plaintiff's patents resulting from the use of certain refuse handling equipment in the performance of a service contract awarded by the Department of the Air Force for the collection and removal of refuse at Andrews Air Force Base, resolution of the legal issues presented by the parties will simplify the remainder of the case which involves a number of other contracts awarded under substantially similar circumstances.

Under the Andrews contract, the contractor, Associated Refuse and Compaction Services, Inc. (Associated Refuse), was required, among other things, to furnish and install certain equipment, including refuse compactors and containers of specified size, at various locations on the base, and to remove at regular intervals all refuse collected in the containers. Since some of the facilities on the base were large enough to use efficiently stationary refuse compactors which compress solid waste into detachable containers, use of such equipment was expressly provided for by the terms of the contract.

Plaintiff originally claimed that it was entitled to compensation under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a), because the refuse [***8]  compactors and detachable containers utilized by Associated Refuse in the performance of the Andrews contract incorporated the subject matter of two of plaintiff's patents -- No. 3,229,622, which relates to the refuse compactors, and No. 3,144,149, which relates to the detachable containers. However, since plaintiff has apparently withdrawn all claims involving the former patent, we need only consider plaintiff's allegations regarding the detachable containers.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.