Patenting inventions in bionanotechnology: A guide for scientists and lawyers

Bionanotechnology: Global Prospects

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 309-337

  Bawa, Raj ^a  

^a Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85056960457     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (89)

1. Edwards SA: The Nanotech Pioneers-Where Are They Taking US? Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim, Germany (2006);
2. Van Lente MA: Building the new world of nanotechnology. Case W. Res. J. Int. Law 38(1), 173-215 (2006).
3. Reisch MS: Nano goes big time. Chemical & Engineering News 85(4), 22-25 (2007).
4. The Nanotech Report (4th Edition). Lux Research, Inc., New York (2006).
5. Report: Sizing Nanotechnology’s Value Chain, Lux Research, New York (2004).
6. Editors: Nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology 1(1), 8-10 (2006).
7. What is Nanotechnology? The National Nanotechnology Initiative. www.nano.gov/html/facts/whatIsNano.html [last accessed April 10, 2008].
8. Bawa R: Nanotechnology patenting in the U.S. Nanotechnology Law & Business 1, 31-50 (2004);
9. Bawa R: Patents and nanomedicine. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007);
10. Bawa R, Bawa SR, Maebius SB, Iyer C: Bionanotechnology patents: Challenges and opportunities. In: The Biomedical Engineering Handbook (3rd Edition). Bronzino JD (Ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL; 29-1-29-16 (2006);
11. Morrow KL, Bawa R, Wei C: Recent advances in basic and clinical nanomedicine. In: Medical Clinics of North America, 91(5), 805-843 (2007).
12. Bawa R, Bawa SR: Protecting new inventions in nanomedicine. In: Foresight, Innovation, and Strategy: Towards a Wiser Future. Wagner CG (Ed.), World Future Society Press, Bethesda, MD, 31-44 (2005);
13. Bawa R, Bawa SR, Maebius SB, Flynn T, Wei C. Protecting new ideas and inventions in nanomedicine with patents. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine 1(2), 150-158 (2005).
14. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Programs of Excellence in Nanotechnology. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HL-04-020.htm.
15. Regalando A: Nanotechnology patents surge as companies vie to stake claim. Wall Street Journal June 18 Issue, A1 (2004).
16. Jones R: What can biology teach us? Nature Nanotechnology 1, 85-86 [2006])
17. Bawa R: Patents and Nanomedicine. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007).
18. DiMasi J, Hansen R, Grabowski H: The price of innovation: New estimates of drug development costs. Journal of Health Economics 22, 151-185 (2003);
19. Adams C, Brantner V: Estimating the cost of new drug development: Is it really $ 802m? Health Affairs 25(2), 420-428 (2006).
20. Anon R: Health Informatics into the 21st Century. HealthCare Reports. Reuters Business Insight February (1999).
21. Erickson J: Translation research and drug development. Science 312, 997 (2006).
22. Sussman NL, Kelly JH: Saving time and money in drug discovery-A pre-emptive approach. In: Business Briefings: Future Drug Discovery 2003. Business Briefings Ltd, London, UK, 46-49 (2003).
23. Owens J: Ethical medicine or IP dodge? Nat. Rev. Drug Disc. 6, 104 (2007).
24. Report: Nanobiotechnology Opportunities and Technical Analysis. San Mateo, CA, Front Line Strategic Consulting (2003).
25. Report: Nanotechnology in Healthcare. The Freedonia Group, Inc. Cleveland, OH (2007).
26. Generic Drugs: Questions and Answers, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, http://www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo/generics_q&a.htm (last accessed April 9, 2008).
27. Merges RP: Commercial success and patent standards: Economic perspectives on innovation. Cal L. Rev. 76, 803-845 (1988).
28. McGrath M: The patent provisions in TRIPS: Protecting reasonable remuneration for services rendered-Or the latest development in Western colonialism. European Intellectual Property Review 18, 398-453 (1996).
29. Saini A: Making the poor pay. NewScientist 193(2597), 20 (2007).
30. Tremblay JF: Drug patents struggles in Asia. Chem. Eng. News 85(6), 11 (2007).
31. Jaffe AB, Lerner J: Innovation and its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System Is Endangering Innovation and Progress. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (2004).
32. Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I. Ltd. et al. 545 U.S., No. 03-1237 (2005).
33. Wegner H: The USPTO’s 54% allowance rate. IPFrontline.com, Dec. 30, 2006, http://www.ipfrontline.com/depts/article. asp?id=13796&deptid=5 (last accessed May 4, 2008).
34. Quillen CD, Webster OH: Continuing patent applications and the USPTO-Updated. Federal Circuit Bar Journal 15, 635 (2006).
35. Ebert LB: On patent quality and patent reform. Journal of the Patent & Trademark Office Society 88(12), 1068-1076 (2006).
36. Press Release, USPTO, USPTO issues 7 millionth patent. Feb. 14, 2006, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/06-09.htm (last accessed May 4, 2008).
37. Regalando A: Nanotechnology patents surge as companies vie to stake claim. Wall Street Journal June 18 Issue, A1 (2004).
38. McKie S: Innovation asset management: Don’t bottle up creativity. Intelligent Enterprise, Dec. 1, 2006, http://www.intelligententerprise.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=194500328 (last accessed June 10, 2008).
39. Farrell C: Follow the patents. BusinessWeek January 8 Issue, 78-79 (2007).
40. Forman D: IP storm clouds build on horizon. Small Times 21-24 (2004).
41. Bawa R, Bawa SR, Maebius SB, Iyer C: Bionanotechnology patents: Challenges and opportunities. In: The Biomedical Engineering Handbook (3rd Edition). Bronzino JD (Ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL; 29-1-29-16 (2006).
42. O’Neill S, Hermann K, Klein M, Landes J, Bawa R: Broad claiming in nanotechnology patents: Is litigation inevitable? Nanotechnology Law and Business 4(1), 595-606 (2007).
43. New Cross-Reference Digest for Nanotechnology. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, August 2004, www.uspto.gov/web/patents/biochempharm/crossref.htm
44. Blackman M: Editorial. World Patent Information 29, 4-7 [2007].)
45. Notice: Internet Usage Policy, 64 Federal Register 33,056,33,061, Dept. of Commerce (1999).
46. Petherbridge L: Positive examination. IDEA 173, 182-183 (2006).
47. Harris D, Bawa R: The carbon nanotube patent landscape in nanomedicine. Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents 17(9), 1165-1174 (2007).
48. Weiss R: Nanotechnology regulation needed, critics say. Washington Post, Dec. 5, 2005, A08, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2005/12/04/AR2005120400729.html (last accessed May 4, 2008)
49. Bawa, R: Patents and nanomedicine. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007);
50. Van Lente MA: Building the new world of nanotechnology. Case W. Res. J. Int. Law 38(1), 173-215 (2006);
51. Bawa R: Nanotechnology patents and the U.S. Patent Office. Small Times 4, IP8 (2004);
52. Huang Z et al: Longitudinal patent analysis for nanoscale science and engineering: country, institution and technology field. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 5, 333 (2003);
53. Bawa R, Bawa SR, Maebius SB: The nanotechnology patent ‘gold rush.’ Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 10, 426-433 (2005);
54. Lawrence S: Patently absurd: Too many patents could kill nanotechnology. Red Herring November 20 Issue, 119 (2002);
55. Jaffe AB, Lerner J: Patent prescription: A radical cure for the ailing US patent system. IEEE Spectrum 42, 38-43 (2005);
56. Sabety T: Nanotechnology innovation and the patent thicket: Which IP policies promote growth? Nanotechnology Law & Business 1(3), 262-283 (2004).
57. Ilakovac V et al: Reliability of disclosure forms of authors’ contributions. Canadian Medical Association Journal 176, 41
58. available at http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/176/1/41 (last accessed June 10, 2008);
59. Pololi L, Knight S, Dunn K: Facilitation scholarly writing in academic medicine. Journal of General Internal Medicine 19(1), 64-68 (2004).
60. Mcdonald D: Fighting the modern patent wars. Intellectual Property Today 14(1), 7 (2007).
61. The Press Register. http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2007/01/lafrance-on-jaffelerner-on-patent.html (last accessed June 10, 2008).
62. Marasco CA: Overlooked opportunities in government. Chemical and Engineering News 85(11), 47-50 (2007).
63. Hultquist S: Statistical musings. Intellectual Property Today 14(5), 48 (2007).
64. Sabety T: Nanotechnology innovation and the patent thicket: Which IP policies promote growth? Nanotechnology Law & Business 1(3), 262-283 (2004).
65. Wegner H: Post grant review: is the PTO up to the task? www.ipfrontline.com/printtemplate.asp?id=15015 (last accessed June 10, 2008).
66. The Nanotech Report (5th Edition). Lux Research, Inc., New York (2008).
67. Editor: Poachers to blame for patent delays. New Scientist 194(2600), 23 (2007).
68. Bawa R: Patents and Nanomedicine. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007).
69. Shapiro C: Patent system reform: Economic analysis and critique. Berkeley Technology Law Journal 19, 1017-1019 (2004).
70. Shapiro C: Navigating the patent thicket: cross licenses, patent pools and standard-setting. Innovation Policy Econ. 1, 119-150 (2000).
71. Nanotechnology gold rush yields crowded, entangled patents. Lux Research, www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=09134 (last accessed May 8, 2008).
72. Van Lente MA: Building the new world of nanotechnology. Case W. Res. J. Int. Law 38(1), 173-215 (2006);
73. Harris D, Bawa R: The carbon nanotube patent landscape in nanomedicine. Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents 17(9), 1165-1174 (2007).
74. O’Neill S, Hermann K, Klein M, Landes J, Bawa R: Broad claiming in nanotechnology patents: Is litigation inevitable? Nanotechnology Law and Business 4(1), 595-606 (2007).
75. Lawrence S: Patently absurd: Too many patents could kill nanotechnology. Red Herring November 20 Issue, 119 (2002).
76. Sabety T: Nanotechnology innovation and the patent thicket: Which IP policies promote growth? Nanotechnology Law & Business 1(3), 262-283 (2004).
77. Harris D, Miller J, Bawa R, Cleveland JT, O’Neill S: Strategies for resolving patent disputes over nanoparticle drug delivery systems. Nanotechnology Law and Bus, 1(4), 101-118 (2004);
78. Bawa R, Bawa SR, Maebius SB, Iyer C: Bionanotechnology patents: Challenges and opportunities. In: The Biomedical Engineering Handbook (3rd Edition). Bronzino JD (Ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL; 29-1-29-16 (2006).
79. Bawa R: Patenting nanomedicine: A catalyst for commercialization? Small Times 5(8), 16 (2005);
80. Bawa R: Will the nanomedicine “patent land grab” thwart commercialization? Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine 1, 346-350 (2005);
81. Bawa R: Patents and Nanomedicine. Nanomedicine 2(3), 351-374 (2007).
82. Report: To Promote Innovation: The Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy. Washington, DC: Federal Trade Commission, (2003);
83. Merrill SA, Levin RC, Myers MB (Eds): A Patent System for the 21st Century. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2004);
84. Mittal AK, Kootz LD: Improvements Needed to Better Manage Patent Office Automation and Address Workforce Challenges. Report GAO-05-1008T, U.S. Government Accountability Office, Washington, DC (2005);
85. Report: US Patent and Trademark Office: Transforming to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century. National Academy of Public Administration, Washington, DC (2005).
86. Sandburg B: Patent reform bill gets cool reception from Rx industry; damage cap is worry. F-D-C Report 69(17), 8-9 (2007);
87. Hess G: Patent reform stalls in Senate. Chemical and Engineering News 86(22), 40-43 (2008).
88. Bawa R: Patenting nanomedicine: A catalyst for commercialization? Small Times 5(8), 16 (2005);
89. Bawa R: Will the nanomedicine “patent land grab” thwart commercialization? Nanomedicine, Nanotech. Biol. Med. 1, 346-350 (2005).