The application was therefore pending in the department fourteen years, during thirteen of which the invention was the property of the telephone company.

The Court's majority opinion, by Justice Brewer, began by noting that this was the first case by the United States "to set aside a patent for an invention as wrongfully issued.

"[6] Applying this principle to the government's first argument, the Court asked what caused the thirteen years of delay—"It may have been caused either by the negligent or wrongful action of the officers of the department, and without any connivance, assistance, or concurrence on the part of the applicant, or it may have been brought about by the applicant, either through its corruption of the public officers or through other misconduct on its part.

As for the second argument—double patenting—the Court said the patent office had made a determination on that point that "was adverse to the [present] contention of the government, and such judgment cannot be reviewed in this suit.

"[10] The reason was the government lacked standing to litigate that issue: [W]hen it has no proprietary or pecuniary result in the setting aside of the patent, is not seeking to discharge its obligations to the public, when it has brought the suit simply to help an individual, making itself, as it were, the instrument by which the right of that individual against the patentee can be established—then it becomes subject to the rules governing like suits between private litigants.

[15] Specifically, if a patentee defended price-fixing on the ground that it was permissible under the 1926 General Electric case, the government could overcome that defense by showing the patent was invalid.

The district court cited Bell Telephone as authority for the government's lack of standing to challenge patent validity.

Text of United States v. American Bell Telephone Co., 167 U.S. 224 (1897) is available from: CourtListener Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Library of Congress