Thomas v Michael

Name: Thomas v. Michael

• Item Type: case
• Cite: 166 F.2d 944
• Year: 1948
• Bluebook Cite: Thomas v. Michael, 166 F.2d 944 (C.C.P.A. 1948).
  
• Author:
• url: 166 F.2d 944
  

Summary

Decision reversing the result of an interference proceeding. The invention at issue related to “a process for producing a silica-alumina composite catalyst” which “defined a novel process for producing an old and well-known silica-alumina composite catalyst.” The Board of Interference Examiners awarded priority to appellees Michael et al., “based on the ground that the utility of the catalyst produced by appellants was not known at the time it was prepared.” The issue on appeal was whether the utility of that product was or was not know in the art at that time. The court, concluding from the facts that the utility of the catalyst produced by the process in question was known in the art and known to the appellants, held that “the decision of the board requiring a test of the catalyst to effect its reduction to practice was manifestly wrong.”

Excerpts and notes

quote -- Where the utility of a new product produced by a novel process is not known or apparent, a test is required to establish reduction to practice of that process. But where the utility of an old product produced by a novel process is known, a...

---