Quimbee logo with url
From our private database of 14,600+ case briefs...

Brenner, Commissioner of Patents v. Manson

United States Supreme Court
383 U.S. 519 (1966)


Facts

Manson (plaintiff) invented a process for making known steroids and filed a patent application claiming the process. However, three years before his filing date, two other inventors had filed their own patent application claiming the same process. Manson provided proof of prior inventorship and sought an interference with those inventors. The examiner denied the request for interference on the basis that Manson’s application failed to disclose utility for the compounds produced by the claimed process. The Patent Office Board of Appeals affirmed the rejection and the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA) reversed. Brenner appealed on behalf of the Patent Office.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fortas, J.)

Dissent (Harlan, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 275,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,600 briefs, keyed to 196 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.