Abstract
Market competition and a recent agbiotech case highlight the importance of deciding what is patentable subject matter.
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
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
See, for example, US Patent Nos. 5,843,782; 5,436,395; 5,066,830.
See, for example, US Patent No. 5,844,118.
US Patent No. 5,900,525.
For review, see Moffatt, A.S. Science 282, 2176– 2178 (1998) and Holzman, D. Gen. Eng. News 2/15, 1, 8 & 35 (1999).
Agris, C.H. Nature Biotechnology 17, 197–198 (1999).
US Patent No. 5,639,947.
Seide, R.K. & Macleod, J.M. 377–458 in Eighth Ann. Patent Prosecution Workshop, Practicing Law Inst. (1998).
US Patent No. 5,783,394.
Pub. L. No. 100-418, Title IX, Subtitle A, 101 Stat. 128 (1998), codified as 19 USC 1337 (1991).
Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. v. J.E.M. Ag Supply Inc. 49 USPQ 2d 1813 (N. District Iowa, 1998).
35 USC 101 states that any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter invented or discovered is patentable.
35 USC 161–164.
7 USC 2321 et seq.
Pioneer Hi-Bred International at 49 USPQ 2d at 1817, 1819.
Baggot, B. Gen. Eng. News 2/1, 1 (1999).
T356/93 (OJEPO 1995, 345).
The full text and commentary can be downloaded from http://wuesthoff.de/c.htm.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Author notes
Cheryl H. Agris is a patent attorney based in , and is special counsel to
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Agris, C. Patenting plants: What to claim. Nat Biotechnol 17, 717–718 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1038/10938
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/10938