To what extent will KSR limit combination inventions in biotech?
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
KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007).
Yamanaka, M. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 1085–1086 (2008).
Pfizer v. Apotex, 480 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Eisai Co. v. Dr. Reddy's Labs. Ltd. 533 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 US 1 (1966).
KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. at 1739–1743.
KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. at 1741.
In re Sullivan, 498 F.3d 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
In re Sullivan, 498 F.3d at 1353.
Innogenetics NV v. Abbott Labs., 512 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Innogenetics NV v. Abbott Labs., 512 F.3d at 1373.
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d at 1363.
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d at 1360.
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d at 1374–1378.
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d at 1378.
Innogenetics v. Abbott Labs., 512 F.3d at 1373.
KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S. Ct. at 1742.
Pharmastem Therapeutics v. Viacell, 491 F.3d at 1363.
Acknowledgements
H.K.W. thanks his parents, Sie Ting and Prapasri, his sister, Meelynn, and his wife, Joanne Kong, for their unconditional love and support. He dedicates this piece to his grandmother Tangon Thanesuan, his grandaunt Dorothy Hwang, and his mother-in-law, Esther Soo Kong, who continue to inspire him to think creatively and believe in what is right. You will never be forgotten.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wong, H., Lau, D. Combine and conquer: handling biotech combination inventions in the wake of KSR. Nat Biotechnol 27, 446–448 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0509-446
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0509-446
This article is cited by
-
The obviousness rejection as a barrier to biotech patent prosecution
Nature Biotechnology (2009)