What are the implications of recent US Supreme Court decisions on the patent eligibility of stem cells?
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Armstrong, L. et al. Stem Cells 30, 2–9 (2012).
Schwartz, S.D. et al. Lancet 379, 713–720 (2012).
Tachibana, M. et al. Cell 153, 1228–1238 (2013).
Burrone, E. Patents at the core: the biotech business (2006). http://www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/patents_biotech_fulltext.html
Bergman, K. & Graff, G.D. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 419–424 (2007).
Mayo v. Prometheus, 566 US 132 (2012).
Parker v. Flook, 437 US 584 (1978).
Hirshfeld, A.H. 2012 Interim Procedure for Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis of Process Claims Involving Laws of Nature (USPTO memorandum, 3 July 2012). http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/exam/2012_interim_guidance.pdf
Rogers, E.J. J. Pat. Trademark Off. Soc. 19, 93 (2011).
Ass'n v. USPTO, 702 F. Supp. 2d 181 (S.D.N.Y., 2010).
Ass'n v. USPTO, 653 F. 3d 1329 (2011).
Ass'n v. USPTO, 689 F. 3d 1303 (2012).
Ass'n v. Myriad, 569 US 12–398 (2013).
Hirshfeld, A.H. Supreme Court Decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (USPTO memorandum, 13 June 2013). http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/exam/myriad_20130613.pdf
Hirshfeld, A.H. 2014 Procedure for Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis of Claims Reciting or Involving Laws of Nature/Natural Principles, Natural Phenomena, and/or Natural Products (USPTO memorandum, 4 March, 2014). http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/exam/myriad-mayo_guidance.pdf
Zuhn, D.L. USPTO Holds Forum on Subject Matter Eligibility—Part I (Patent Docs, 12 May 2014). http://www.patentdocs.org/2014/05/uspto-holds-forum-on-subject-matter-eligibility-part-i.html
Zuhn, D.L. USPTO Holds Forum on Subject Matter Eligibility—Part III (Patent Docs, 15 May 2014). http://www.patentdocs.org/2014/05/uspto-holds-forum-on-subject-matter-eligibility-part-iii.html
Offit, K. et al. J. Clin. Oncol. 31, 2743–2748 (2013).
Rosenfeld, J.A. & Mason, C.E. Genome Med. 5, 27 (2013).
Thomson, J.A. US Patent No. 6,200,806 (2001).
Section 27 of Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Public Law 112-29 (2011).
In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (2008).
Acknowledgements
We thank N. Yi-Chen Su for insights into and comments on this article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare competing financial interests: details are available in the online version of the paper (doi:10.1038/nbt.2945).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chan, AK., Wong, AT. & Lee, HM. A patent perspective on US stem cell research. Nat Biotechnol 32, 633–637 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2945
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2945
This article is cited by
-
A “Ray of Hope” for European Stem Cell Patents or “Out of the Smog into the Fog”? An Analysis of Recent European Case Law and How it Compares to the US
IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (2016)