About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristant #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Debate over H.R. 1249 Continues | Main | 2011 BIO International Convention Preview - Part I »

June 15, 2011

Comments

Kevin,

Yet another misguided effort to ban patenting of living subject matter that is as perverse as the Becerra bills. Again, can only hope that this sort of nonsense will simply sink H.R. 1249 with no survivors.

Claims "directed to" human organisms?

Is medicine "directed to" a human organism?

Aside from any "tracking" or "apparant" link, the "direct" reading of this amendment is far more extensive than you might be inclined to think.

Dear Skeptical:

No doubt - there is mischief to be made here, which is why the language of the bill needs work. I don't think legislative history will be sufficient.

Thanks for the comment.

The comments to this entry are closed.

August 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31