Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Bilski blundering biotech

Nature Biotechnology volume 27, pages 245–248 (2009)Cite this article

Is the Federal Circuit's decision in In re: Bilski yet a further restraint on patenting biotech and pharmaceutical inventions?

Given recent changes in the law, the state of the global economy and the recent election of a new president and executive government in the United States, there is a palpable apprehension regarding pharmaceutical and biotech intellectual property (IP), specifically in patent procurement and enforcement. Even though there are uncertainties in navigating such changes, biotech companies and universities must nonetheless pursue their fundamental goal of developing innovative new products. Navigating change is further complicated by the reality that almost every biological innovation, particularly those having significant potential to mature into drug candidates, fails at some juncture of development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

References

  1. Anonymous. The Economic Times 3 February 2009 <http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/News_By_Industry/One_third_of_small_biotech_pharma_cos_in_US_to_loose_biz/articleshow/4071531.cms>.

  2. Giovanetti, G.T. & Jaggi, G. Beyond Borders: Global Biotechnology Report 2008 (Ernst & Young, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dernis, H. Compendium of Patent Statistics 2008 (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, 2008) <http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/19/37569377.pdf>.

    Google Scholar 

  4. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US _____ (2007).

  5. Quanta v. LG Electronics, __ US __ (2008).

  6. In re: Seagate Technology, LLC, Misc. Dkt. No. 830 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 20, 2007).

  7. In re: Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc).

  8. 35 USC §273.

  9. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. v. EON Labs, Inc., EDNY (1-04-cv-05540) (2009).

  10. Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., Fed. Cir., No. 2008-1248.

  11. Dutra, T. BNA's Patent, Trademark & Copyright J. 25 (2009)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. William J. Simmons is at Sughrue Mion, Washington, DC, USA, and was previously at New york University by grant of the National Institutes of Health. The views expressed are solely the author's and do not represent those of the NIH or Sughrue Mion and its clients and are subject to changes in the art and law. wsimmons@sughrue.com,

    William J Simmons

Authors
  1. William J Simmons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simmons, W. Bilski blundering biotech. Nat Biotechnol 27, 245–248 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0309-245

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0309-245

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing