Changing patent strategies: What will they mean for the industry?

Nature Biotechnology

Volumn 25, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 867-868

  Mills, Ann E ^a   Tereskerz, Patti M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOTECHNOLOGICAL PROCEDURES; DNA PACKAGING; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG MANUFACTURE; PATENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SHORT SURVEY;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; DNA; INDUSTRY; ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES; PATENTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 34547781170     PISSN: 10870156     EISSN: 15461696     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nbt0807-867     Document Type: Short Survey

References (13)

1. Heller M.A. & Eisenberg R.S. Science 280, 698-701 (1998).
2. Aggarwal, S. Gupta, V. & Bagchi-Sen S. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 643-651 (2006).
3. Lawrence S. Nat. Biotechnol. 22, 930-931 (2004)
4. Hopkins M.M. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 185-187 (2007).
5. Pressman L. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 31-35 (2006).
6. FR Doc 01-322, Federal Register 66, No. 4 (Jan. 2001).
7. Univ. of Rochester v. G.D. Searle & Co., 249 F. Supp. 2d 216 (W.D. N.Y. 2003) (Addendum, Tab B, A0001-33).
8. Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd., et al., 125 S. Ct. 2372 (2005).
9. In re Fisher 421 F.3d 1365 (2005).
10. Allison, J.R. et al. 92 Geo. L. J. 435-477 (2004).
11. Parchomovsky, G. & Wagner, R.P. 154 U. Pa L. Rev. (2005).
12. Bessen, J. & Meurer, M. 9 Lewis & Clark L. Rev. (Spring 2005).
13. Lanjouw, J.O. & Schankerman, M. Rand. J. Econ. 32, 129-151 (2001).