Although increased patenting has accompanied the development of antivirals as in vivo therapeutics, ongoing US litigation reflects concerns regarding their patentability.
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
USPTO. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, 8th ed., rev. 4, §2164 (USPTO, Alexandria, VA, USA, 2007).
In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737 (Fed. Cir. 1988), quoting Ansul Co. v. Uniroyal, Inc., 448 F.2d 872, 878-79 (2d Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 US 1018 (1972).
PPG Indus., Inc. v. Guardian Indus. Corp., 75 F.3d 1558, 1564 (Fed. Cir. 1996).
Ex Parte Vasquez, 2002 WL 465382 at 4-7 (BPAI).
Dionne v. Liotta, 2001 WL 34373630 at 5-6 (BPAI).
Ex Parte Jarvest, 2001 WL 3581155 at 4 (BPAI).
USPTO. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, 8th ed., rev. 4 §2149 (USPTO, Alexandria, VA, USA, 2007).
Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 US 1, 17–18 (1966).
KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727 (2007).
Teitelbaum, R. & Cohen, M. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1105–1106 (2007).
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 05 Civ. 1887 (D.NJ Sept. 6, 2007), 2007 WL 2669338.
Id.
Id.
Yeh, B.T. CRS Report for Congress: Influenza Antiviral Drugs and Patent Law Issues (Congressional Research Services, Washington, DC, USA, 2005).
US Constitution, Amendment V.
28 USC §1498(a) (2007).
In re Strahilevitz 668 F.2d 1229, 1232 (CCPA 1982).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lu, D., Collison, A. & Kowalski, T. Patentability issues surrounding antivirals. Nat Biotechnol 25, 1403–1404 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1207-1403
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1207-1403
