Abstract
Patents are designed to protect and encourage creativity and innovation. Patenting a biomedical discovery can be a requirement before a pharmaceutical company or biotech entity will invest in the lengthy and capital-intensive drug development and clinical trials necessary to achieve patient benefit. Although scientists and clinicians are well versed in research publication requirements, patent descriptions and claims are formatted in a manner quite different from a research paper. Patents require (a) a series of logical statements clearly delineating the boundaries of the novel aspects of the invention and (b) sufficient disclosure of the invention so that it can be reproduced by others. Patents are granted only for inventions that meet three conditions: novelty, non-obviousness, and usefulness. Recent changes to US patent law limit the scope of patentable material. Products of nature such as nucleic acids and proteins, or steps used to observe natural events, are no longer patent eligible. This chapter provides basic guidelines and definitions for inventions, inventorship, and patent filing which are summarized using a question and answer format.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cockburn I, Long G (2015) The importance of patents to innovation: updated cross-industry comparisons with biopharmaceuticals. Expert Opin Ther Pat 25(7):739–742. doi:10.1517/13543776.2015.1040762
Jones BW (2006) Broadening the scope of inherent anticipation and its impact on the patentability of chemical structures, comment, SmithKline v. Apotex. 5. J Marshall Rev Intell Prop L 456:455–476
Gholz CL (2007) A critique of recent opinions in patent interferences. J Pat Trademark Off Soc 89:1–43
Merges RP (1999) The law and economics of employee inventions. Harvard J Law Technol 13(1):1–53
Bocquet F, Paubel P (2015) A long war begins: biosimilars versus patented biologics. J Med Econ 18(12):1071–1073. doi:10.3111/13696998.2015.1075996
Kelton T (2007) Pharmacogenomics: the rediscovery of the concept of tailored drug therapy and personalized medicine. Health Lawyer 19(3):1–10
Shi Q (2005) Patent system meets new sciences: is the law responsive to changing technologies and industries? NYU Ann Surv Am Law 61(317):317–346
Aceto JF (2013) Patent portfolios after myriad, how to fit in those new genes? ACS Med Chem Lett 4(8):681–683. doi:10.1021/ml400254f
Yao C (2012) Federal circuit holds isolated DNA is patent-eligible—Association for Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent And Trademark Office (Myriad III). Am J Law Med 38(4):755–757
Huys I, Van Overwalle G, Matthijs G (2011) Gene and genetic diagnostic method patent claims: a comparison under current European and US patent law. Eur J Hum Genet 19(10):1104–1107. doi:10.1038/ejhg.2011.76
Ledford H (2010) US government wants limits on gene patents. Nature. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101102/full/news.2010.576.html. Accessed 6 March 2011
Wadman M (2010) Breast cancer gene patents judged invalid. Nature. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100330/full/news.2010.160.html. Accessed 6 Marchs 2011
Rogers DL (2013) After prometheus, are human genes patentable? Duke Law Technol Rev 11(2):434–508. SSRN 2185984.
Bocquet F, Paubel P (2016) First monoclonal antibody biosimilars: tackling the challenge of substitution. J Med Econ 19(6):645–647. doi:10.1080/13696998.2016.1178649
Dolak LA (1999) Patents without paper: proving a date of invention with electronic evidence. Houston Law Rev 36:472–530
Gholz CL (2000) First-to-file or first-to-invent? J Pat Trademark Off Soc 82:891–895
Title 37 Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights (2011). United States Code Title 37 Parts 1–199
America Invents Act: Effective Dates (2011). USPTO, Washington, D.C.
Act L-SAI (2011) H.R 1249, vol Public Law 112–29. Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress, Washington, D.C.
Matt J (2002) Searching for an efficacious joint inventorship standard. Boston Coll Law Rev 44:245–287
United States Code Title 35-Patents (2007). Patent laws
Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). (2010) United States Government Printing Office. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/index.htm. Accessed 6 March 2011
Rowe EA (2007) Saving trade secret disclosures on the internet through sequential preservation. BC Intell Prop Tech F 249:1–48
Adamo KR, McCrum RB, Gerber SM (2008) The curse of ‘copying.’ The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law, p 296–324
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Richard Peet for invaluable discussions regarding patent law and intellectual property .
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media LLC
About this protocol
Cite this protocol
Mehta, H., Tidwell, L., Liotta, L.A. (2017). Inventions and Patents: A Practical Tutorial. In: Espina, V. (eds) Molecular Profiling. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 1606. Humana Press, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6990-6_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6990-6_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Humana Press, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-6989-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-6990-6
eBook Packages: Springer Protocols