We use cookies to improve your experience. By continuing to browse this site, you accept our cookie policy.×
Skip main navigation
Aging Health
Bioelectronics in Medicine
Biomarkers in Medicine
Breast Cancer Management
CNS Oncology
Colorectal Cancer
Concussion
Epigenomics
Future Cardiology
Future Microbiology
Future Neurology
Future Oncology
Future Rare Diseases
Future Virology
Hepatic Oncology
HIV Therapy
Immunotherapy
International Journal of Endocrine Oncology
International Journal of Hematologic Oncology
Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine
Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Lung Cancer Management
Melanoma Management
Nanomedicine
Neurodegenerative Disease Management
Pain Management
Pediatric Health
Personalized Medicine
Pharmacogenomics
Regenerative Medicine
Published Online:https://doi.org/10.2217/17460751.1.5.697

Investors in any new technology are concerned to protect their investment, a key part of such protection being the availability of patent protection. Stem cells, human embryonic stem cells in particular, are a highly controversial area, and this controversy extends to the patenting of stem cells. In this article, the legal issues affecting patenting of stem cell technology in the USA and Europe are reviewed. The types of patents that have been granted are also considered, as an illustration of the protection that can be obtained. Finally, the overall trends in patent filings are discussed, to identify key aspects of the patent landscape.

Bibliography

  • 35 USC §101Google Scholar
  • Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 US 303 (1980).Google Scholar
  • Lowell v. Lewis, 15 F. Cas. 1018, 1019 (C.C.D. Mass. 1817).Google Scholar
  • EPC Art 83Google Scholar
  • EPC Art 84Google Scholar
  • EPC Art 53(a)Google Scholar
  • Directive 98/44/EC, Official Journal of the European Communities L213/13 (1998).Google Scholar
  • Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with Regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine. Oviedo, Spain, 4 April (1997).Google Scholar
  • EPO Board of Appeal decision T1374/04, April (2006).Google Scholar
  • 10  Currently pending as Enlarged Board of Appeal case G2/06Google Scholar
  • 11  Taymor KS, Thomas Scott C, Greely HT: The paths around stem cell intellectual property. Nat. Biotechnol. 24(4),411–413 (2006).Crossref, Medline, CASGoogle Scholar
  • 12  Marks & Clerk Biotechnology Report 2006.Google Scholar
  • 13  Marks & Clerk Biotechnology Report 2005.Google Scholar
  • 101  UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH: EP-0695351B1 (1999).Google Scholar
  • 102  WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION: EP-0770125A1Google Scholar
  • 103  THOMSON: US6200806 (2001).Google Scholar
  • 104  THOMSON: US5843780 (1998).Google Scholar
  • 105  THOMSON: US7029913 (2006).Google Scholar
  • 201  Opinion number 15 of the European Group on Ethics “Ethical aspects of human stem cell research and use”, November 2000. http://europa.eu.int/comm/european_group_ethics/avis_en.htmGoogle Scholar
  • 202  The Patent Office: inventions involving human embryonic stem cells www.patent.gov.uk/patent/notices/practice/stemcells.htmGoogle Scholar
  • 203  Reuters industry summits http://today.reuters.com/summit/summitinfo.aspx?name=BiotechnologySummit06Google Scholar