In Vivo is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited
This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183
Printed By
This article was originally published in Clinica
In declaring that isolated DNA is not patent eligible, but complementary DNA (cDNA) is, the US Supreme Court has left open the opportunity for mischief for further attempts to narrow or undermine the patentability of DNA genetic materials in a broader sense. That is the view of San Francisco lawyer Robert Sachs, a partner in the Intellectual Property Practice Group at Fenwick & West.
| Table |
|---|
Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers. Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.
Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.
All fields are required.
All set! This article has been sent to my@email.address.
All fields are required. For multiple recipients, separate email addresses with a semicolon.
Please Note: Only individuals with an active subscription will be able to access the full article. All other readers will be directed to the abstract and would need to subscribe.
