Patent Prosecution Strategies for Biotechnological Inventions

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (6) ◽  
pp. 697-702
Author(s):  
Jenny J. Yeh ◽  
Dennis Fernandez
Keyword(s):  
Prosecution Strategies ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions

scholarly journals Patent Prosecution Strategies for Stem Cell–Related Applications

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 769-774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rajeev Kumar ◽  
Jenny J. Yeh ◽  
Dennis Fernandez ◽  
Nels Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Stem Cell Research ◽  
Health Care Demand ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Prosecution Strategies ◽  
High Level ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions

Stem cell research and the intellectual property derived from it, because of its potential to completely transform health care, demand an especially high level of consideration from business and patent prosecution perspectives. As with other revolutionary technologies, ordinary risks are amplified (e.g., litigation), and ordinarily irrelevant considerations may become important (e.g., heightened level of both domestic and foreign legislative risk). In the first part of this article, general strategies for patent prosecutors such as several prosecution considerations and methods for accelerating patent prosecution process are presented. In the second part, patent prosecution challenges of stem cell—related patents and possible solutions are discussed. In the final part, ethical and public policy issues particular to stem cell—related and other biotechnological inventions are summarized. ( Journal of Biomolecular Screening 2007:769-774)

Development and Implications of Patent Law

2005 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
European Commission
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Cell Lines ◽  
Human Body ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Human Stem Cells ◽  
Working Paper ◽  
Key Events ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions

AbstractIntroductionThis is the second report pursuant to Article 16c of the Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions and bears the title “Developments and implications of patent law in the field of biotechnology and genetic engineering” (hereinafter the “second 16c Report”).Its purpose is to set out the key events which have occurred since publication of the first 16c Report, and to comment on two issues identified in the latter: the scope of patents on sequences or partial sequences of genes which have been isolated from the human body; and the patentability of human stem cells and cell lines obtained from them. The Commission’s analysis is based on the Commission staff working paper SEC(2005)943.

Intellectual Property Rights, Biotechnology and Discourses of Development: Internal Contradictions and Forms of Resistance

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishana Persaud
Keyword(s):  
Poverty Reduction ◽  
Food System ◽  
Global South ◽  
Food Crisis ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
Nuanced Understanding ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions ◽  
Global Food

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights identifies freedom from hunger and malnutrition as a fundamental human right of every individual. The current global food crisis undermines this right and has multi‐faceted repercussions for poverty reduction and sustainable development in the Global South. A plethora of explanations have been proposed regarding the causes of the current food crisis, while a biotechnological solution involving the expansion of Genetically Modified (GM) seeds in the Global South has gained renewed momentum and simultaneously increased resistance. This presentation will provide a nuanced understanding of the promotion of IPRs and biotechnological ‘inventions’ as contemporary facets of a hegemonic modernization discourse of development. By first critically examining the development of IPRs and their relation to biotechnology I provide a basis for understanding the internal contradictions of this technologically reductionist discourse. Using a detailed case study from India, I then illustrate the way in which the internal contradictions of this discourse result in particular forms of resistance which significantly challenge the structure of the global food system.

7. Secondary Patentability Requirements

2019 ◽  
pp. 162-177
Author(s):  
Justine Pila ◽  
Paul L.C. Torremans
Keyword(s):  
Subject Matter ◽  
Industrial Application ◽  
European Patent ◽  
Inventive Step ◽  
European Patent Convention ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions ◽  
The Eu

This chapter considers the secondary patentability requirements of the European Patent Convention (EPC). It assumes the existence of a subject matter for which a European patent may validly be granted, and focuses on the legal tests for determining its novelty, inventive step, and susceptibility of industrial application in accordance with Articles 54 to 57 EPC and the corresponding provisions of the EU Biotech Directive for biotechnological inventions.

Patently Unsatisfactory?: Community Legislative Competence and the ECJ Biotech Decision

2001 ◽  
Vol 2 (18) ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm MacLaren
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Good Opportunity ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Legislative Policy ◽  
Biotechnological Inventions ◽  
Community Directive

On 9 October 2001, the European Court of Justice dismissed (1) a challenge by the Netherlands with the support of Italy and Norway against the Community Directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. (2) Although the Biotech Directive relates to a wide range of public concerns and the Application for its annulment was based on a half-dozen different pleas, the following article will focus on the case as it relates to European Community treaty limitations. It will critically examine the perspectives on the principles of harmonisation and subsidiarity presented in the Application, the Advocate General's Opinion and the Court's Judgment within the broader context of the Community/Union's past and future development. The examination will reveal that in this case the Court has foregone a good opportunity to delimit 'positive integration'. (3) It could have made an important contribution to the on-going discussion about power-sharing between the national and supranational levels. While the judgment does strongly affirm the positive integration paradigm, the margins of the EU's legislative policy competences remain blurred due to its oft-opaque reasoning. The judgment raises, directly and indirectly, as many questions as it answers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document