Talk:Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States

This article follows the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Legal. It uses the Bluebook legal referencing style. This citation style uses standardized abbreviations, such as "N.Y. Times" for The New York Times. Please review those standards before making style or formatting changes. Information on this referencing style may be obtained at: Cornell's Basic Legal Citation site.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

U.S. Supreme Court cases Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases, a collaborative effort to improve articles related to Supreme Court cases and the Supreme Court. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.U.S. Supreme Court casesWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesTemplate:WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court casesU.S. Supreme Court articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Adding information regarding the USPTO & Department of Commerce recommendation for Anti-Trust prosecution...

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hey guys, I suggest we add information to this page regarding how this litigation as an anti-trust actually came to be. It also does not mention sufficiently the relationship between this ruling and that mentioned in Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co. What is important about the Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386 (1945), aside from the very specific anti-trust litigation covered in it, is that it was born from the government becoming aware of fraud against an executive agency in the midst of a civil litigation between companies that was then reviewed by USPTO (an executive agency) to the point of recommendation to the DOJ for action, that then resulted in an anti-trust litigation.

That is very important nowadays where we see the executive agencies increasingly under the influence of lobbyists and unfortunately them being the least likely to compel to the DOJ to do anything. Therefore, I think actually obtaining the full-text, linking it, and highlighting the aspect of an executive agency having a part in compelling a DOJ action as a significant precedent in DOJ law is important. I think including excerpts of that would be important.

I am currently requesting the case files and the executive agency files from NARA, and will host them, and then allow us to update the Wiki article to cover the full breadth.

I assume you are all in favor of linking the full-texts of the litigations to the articles links & supporting documentation, as well as inserting a portion of how the USPTO & Department of Commerce reviewed and compelled a DOJ action from review of the civil litigation. The documentation from NARA should be forthcoming soon.

Please give me your thoughts. ForestGumshoe (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Add topic