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.

  • Science and Society
  • Published:

Patenting neuroscience: challenges and opportunities in an interdisciplinary field

Nature Reviews Neuroscience volume 5, pages 657–661 (2004)Cite this article

Abstract

The study of the nervous system draws from many disciplines, including biology, chemistry, medicine, psychology and engineering. A consequence of this interdisciplinary approach is that discoveries in one discipline can inform and supplement other disciplines, and certain intellectual property issues might be encountered more frequently. For example, if a new neurological indication is discovered for a known drug, can this new use be patented? And what about the discovery of biological mechanisms that do not directly identify new drugs or therapies, but make subsequent identification possible? Here, we will explore the extent to which these discoveries are patentable.

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

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

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

Figure 1: Society for Neuroscience: growth in membership 1980–2003.

References

  1. Kirschenbaum, S. R. Patenting basic research: myths and realities. Nature Neurosci. 5, 1025–1027 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Webber, P. M. Protecting your inventions: the patent system. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 2, 823–830 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ergenzinger, E. R. Jr & Spruill, W. M. First, get the patent: quirks of biotech innovation and innovators complicate securing of rights. Legal Times 28–29 (4 Nov 2002).

  4. Ex parte Muller, 81 USPQ 261, (Patent Office, Board of Appeals, 1947).

  5. In re Robertson and Scripps, 169 F.3d 743, Case No. 98-1270 (US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1999). http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/98opinions/98-1270.html

  6. Atlas Powder Co. and Hanex Products Inc. v. Ireco Inc. and ICI Explosvis USA Inc., 190 F.3d 1342, Case No. 99-1041 (US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1999). http://www.law.emory.edu/fedcircuit/sept99/99-1041.wp.html

  7. Abbott Laboratories v. Geneva Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Novopharm Limitited and Invamed, Inc., 182 F.3d 1315, Case Nos 98-1593 to 98-1595 (US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 1999). http://www.law.emory.edu/fedcircuit/july99/98-1593.wp.html

  8. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc. and Apotex Inc and B. C. Sherman and Geneva Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Interpharm Inc., 251 F. 3d 955, Case Nos 99-1262 to 99-1264 and 99-1303 (US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 2001). http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-1262.html

  9. EPO Decision G 5/83, EISAI/Second Medical Indication OJEPO 64 (1985).

  10. John Wyeth & Brothers Ltd's Application and Schering AG's Application RPC 545 (1985).

  11. Hydropyridine (Sweden) 19 IIC 815 (1988).

  12. Hydropyridine (Germany) OJEPO 26 (1984)

  13. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v Baker Norton Pharmaceuticals Inc and Napro Biotherapeutics Inc., Case No 98-1390/A3, 98-7637/A3 (England and Wales Court of Appeals Civil Division, Decision 169, 2000). http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2003/5.html

  14. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd v Merck and Others (England and Wales Court of Appeals Civil Division, Decision 5, 2003). http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Patents/2003/5.html

  15. Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 US 303, 100 S.Ct.2204, Case No. 79-136 (1980). http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=search&court=US&case=/us/447/303.html

  16. University of Rochester v. G. D. Searle & Co., Case No. 03-1304 (US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, 2004). http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/03-1304.doc

  17. EPO Decision T 241/95 Eli Lilly & Co./Serotonin receptor, OJEPO 103 (2001).

  18. Impact of Neuroscience – A Background Paper (US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, OTA-BP-BA–24, Washington DC, 1984)

  19. Pennisi, E. Has neuroscience society growth been too fast for its own good? The Scientist 3, 1 (1989).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alston & Bird LLP, 3201 Beechleaf Court, Suite 600, Raleigh, 27604-1062, North Carolina, USA

    Edward R. Ergenzinger Jr, Michelle L. Cunningham & W. Murray Spruill

  2. Frank B. Dehn & Co., Patent and Trademark Attorneys, 179 Queen Victoria Street, London, EC4V 4EL

    Philip M. Webber

Authors
  1. Edward R. Ergenzinger Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michelle L. Cunningham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philip M. Webber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W. Murray Spruill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Edward R. Ergenzinger Jr.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Related links

Related links

DATABASES

US Patent Office database

FURTHER INFORMATION

European Patent Office website

Patents in general

How to obtain a European Patent

US Patent and Trademark Office website

How to get a Patent

UK Patent Office website

What is a Patent?

How to apply for a Patent

International and national patent organizations

Society for Neuroscience

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ergenzinger, E., Cunningham, M., Webber, P. et al. Patenting neuroscience: challenges and opportunities in an interdisciplinary field. Nat Rev Neurosci 5, 657–661 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1478

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1478

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