Of mice & money: The story of the world's first animal patent

Daedalus

Volumn 131, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 78-88

  Kevles, Daniel J ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1842625281     PISSN: 00115266     EISSN: 15486192     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Testimony of Jaydee R. Hanson ⋯ United Methodist Church, and Andrew W. Kimbrell ⋯ on Behalf of the Coalition on Animal Patenting, U.S. Congress, House, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice, Committee on the Judiciary, Transgenic Animal Patent Reform Act of 1989, 101st Cong., 1st Sess., September 13 and 14,1989, 258-272.
2. U.S. Congress, House, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice, Committee on the Judiciary, Patents and the Constitution: Transgenic Animals, 100th Cong., 1st Sess., June 11, July 22, August 21, and November 5,1987, 27.
3. Fritz Machlup, "Patents," International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, ed. David L. Sills (New York: Macmillan, 1968), XI, 461-464;
4. Bruce W. Bugbee, Genesis of American Patent and Copyright Law (Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs Press, 1967), 152.
5. Ex Parte Latimer, March 12, 1889, C.D., 46 O.G. 1638, U.S. Patent Office, Decisions of the Commissioner of Patents and of the United States Courts in Patent Cases ⋯ 1889 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1890), 123-127.
6. H. Thorne, "Relation of Patent Law to Natural Products," Journal of Patent Office Society 6(1923): 23-28.
7. Brief Amiciis Curiae of the Regents of the University of California, January 1980.
8. Brief of Dr. Leroy Hood, Dr. Thomas Maniatis, Dr. DavidS. Eisenberg, the American Society of Biological Chemists, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the California Institute of Technology, the American Council on Education as Amicus Curiae, January 28,1980.
9. The amicus briefs are with Diamond v. Chakrabarty, U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 79-136, 447 U.S. 303, January 1980.
10. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 100 S. Ct. 2204 (1980), 2206-2212.
11. Jon W. Gordon, George A. Scangos, Diane J. Plotkin, James A. Barbosa, and Frank H. Ruddle, "Genetic Transformation of Mouse Embryos by Microinjection of Purified DNA," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 77 (December 1980): 7380-7384.
12. Ex Parte Allen, United States Patent Quarterly (1987): 1425.
13. Brief on Behalf of the People's Business Commission, Amicus Curiae, 1979.
14. U.S. Congress, House, Hearings before the Subcommittee on Courts, Civil Liberties, and the Administration of Justice, Committee on the Judiciary, Patents and the Constitution: Transgenie Animals, 100th Cong., 1st Sess., June 11, July 22, August 21, and November 5,1987;
15. U.S. Congress, House, Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Administration of Justice, Committee on the Judiciary, Transgenic Animal Patent Reform Act of 1989,101st Cong., 1st Sess., September 13 and 14,1989.
16. European Patent Office, Press Release No. 10/89, "EPO Refuses Patent Application for Oncogenic Mouse."
17. European Patent Office, "Decision of the Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.2. of 3 October 1990."
18. "European Patent Application No. 86 304490.7, President and Fellows of Harvard College, Response to the Official Letter of 11th December 1990 ⋯"
19. European Patent Office, Press Release 3/92, "European Patent for Harvard's Transgenic Mouse."