Editing Utility (patentability requirement) (section)

===Practical utility===
The last utility category is practical or specific utility. According to Mueller, "to be patentable an invention must have some real-world use."<ref>{{cite book |first=Janice M. |last=Mueller |title=Patent Law |page=236 |edition=3rd |year=2009 |location=New York |publisher=Aspen |isbn=9780735578319 }}</ref> The utility threshold is relatively easy to satisfy for mechanical, electrical, or novelty inventions, because the purpose of the utility requirement is to ensure that the invention works on some minimal level.{{Citation needed|date=June 2023}} However, the practical or specific utility requirement for patentability may be more difficult to satisfy for chemical or biological inventions, because of the level of uncertainty in these fields. The [[United States Supreme Court]] in ''[[Brenner v. Manson]]'' (in 1966) 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. The Court ruled, "... 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."<ref name="brenner-1966">Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519 (1966).</ref> Practical or specific utility is the requirement for an invention to have a particular purpose.<ref name="brenner-1966"/>