Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patentability Requirements of Biotech Patents

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biopatent Law: European vs. US Patent Law

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Biotech Patents ((BRIEFSBIOTECH))

Abstract

This chapter discusses patentability requirements in the two major patent jurisdictions, namely novelty, non-obviousness/inventive step, enablement/written description, best mode, and sufficiency of disclosure. Differences between Europe and the United States are highlighted, and practical implications are discussed with respect to the biopatent field.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    35 USC § 101: “Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a Patent therefore”.

  2. 2.

    598 F.3d 1336, 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

  3. 3.

    2010-1144 CAFC.

  4. 4.

    52 F.3d 1043, 1050 (Fed. Cir. 1995).

  5. 5.

    (2008) EWHC 2413 (Pat), 2008 Bailii EWHC 2413.

  6. 6.

    Xa ZR 130/07 (BPatG), 2009, GRUR 2010, 123.

  7. 7.

    501 F.3d 1263 (Fed. Cir. 2007).

  8. 8.

    (2008) EWHC 2345 (Pat), 2008 Bailii EWHC 2345.

  9. 9.

    Olanzapin, X ZR 89/07 (BPatG) 2008, GRUR 2009, 382.

  10. 10.

    05-1396, 05-1429, 05-1430, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 8750.

  11. 11.

    550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007).

  12. 12.

    383 U.S. 1 (1966).

  13. 13.

    Possible in the US and before the EPO, not possible in Japan and China.

  14. 14.

    355 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

  15. 15.

    2010-1144 CAFC.

  16. 16.

    51 F.3d 1552 (Fed. Cir. 1995).

References

  • DiMasi JA, Grabowski HG (2007) The cost of biopharmaceutical R&D: is biotech different? Mange Decis Econ 28:469–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Köhler GF, Milstein C (1975) Continuous cultures of fused cells secreting antibody of predefined specificity. Nature 256:495–497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Overington JP, Al-Lazikani B, Hopkins AL (2006) How many drug targets are there? Nat Rev Drug Discov 5:993–996

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Michalski Huettermann and Partner Patent Attorneys, Speditionstrasse 21, 40221, Duesseldorf, Germany

    Ulrich Storz

Authors
  1. Ulrich Storz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrich Storz .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Storz, U. (2014). Patentability Requirements of Biotech Patents. In: Biopatent Law: European vs. US Patent Law. SpringerBriefs in Biotech Patents. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41293-6_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation