Brenner v. Manson | |
---|---|
Argued November 17, 1965 Decided March 21, 1966 | |
Full case name | Brenner, Commissioner of Patents v. Manson |
Citations | 383 U.S. 519 (more) |
Case history | |
Prior | In re Manson, 333 F.2d 234 (C.C.P.A. 1964); cert. granted, 380 U.S. 971 (1965). |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Fortas, joined by Warren, Black, Clark, Brennan, Stewart, White |
Dissent | Harlan, joined by Douglas |
Laws applied | |
35 U.S.C. § 101 |
Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519 (1966), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that a novel process for making a known steroid did not satisfy the utility requirement, because the patent applicants did not show that the steroid served any practical function.[1] The Court ruled that "a process patent in the chemical field, which has not been developed and pointed to the degree of specific utility, creates a monopoly of knowledge which should be granted only if clearly commanded by the statute."[2] Practical or specific utility, so that a "specific benefit exists in currently available form" is thus the requirement for a claimed invention to qualify for a patent.[3]
The case is known for the statement "a patent is not a hunting license."[4]