New patent rules overturned

A Virginia court struck down today (April 1) linkurl:new patent rules;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53497/ which pharma and biotech companies argued would have limited their ability to protect their intellectual property. The new rules, which were finalized by the US Patent and Trademark Organization (USPTO) last August, limit inventors to two continuing applications, which add claims to an existing patent, and cap the total number of claims in a patent at 25. "Specifically in lif

| 1 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
1:00
Share
A Virginia court struck down today (April 1) linkurl:new patent rules;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53497/ which pharma and biotech companies argued would have limited their ability to protect their intellectual property. The new rules, which were finalized by the US Patent and Trademark Organization (USPTO) last August, limit inventors to two continuing applications, which add claims to an existing patent, and cap the total number of claims in a patent at 25. "Specifically in life sciences that has a huge effect," Lisa Haile, a patent attorney and co-chair of the Global Life Sciences Sector at the law firm DLA Piper, told The Scientist, because the timeframe of life science discoveries is so long. Previously, inventors were allowed to file unlimited continuing applications. University-based inventors and biotech companies could file continuances as the scope of their discoveries became clearer with further research, and, for example, could extend patent coverage from one or two new molecules to an entire class of compounds. The agency, however, argued that the new rules would streamline the patent process and help reduce its backlog of cases. The rules were set to go into effect on November 1, 2007, but in response to a linkurl:lawsuit;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53705/ filed against the USPTO by GlaxoSmithKline the court issued an 11th hour temporary linkurl:injunction;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53814/ against them on October 31 while the case was in process. According to today's court ruling, the patent agency did not have the authority to make such substantive regulatory changes. Haile noted, however, that the ruling can be appealed.
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Meet the Author

  • Alla Katsnelson

    This person does not yet have a bio.
Share
May digest 2025 cover
May 2025, Issue 1

Study Confirms Safety of Genetically Modified T Cells

A long-term study of nearly 800 patients demonstrated a strong safety profile for T cells engineered with viral vectors.

View this Issue
Detecting Residual Cell Line-Derived DNA with Droplet Digital PCR

Detecting Residual Cell Line-Derived DNA with Droplet Digital PCR

Bio-Rad
How technology makes PCR instruments easier to use.

Making Real-Time PCR More Straightforward

Thermo Fisher Logo
Characterizing Immune Memory to COVID-19 Vaccination

Characterizing Immune Memory to COVID-19 Vaccination

10X Genomics
Optimize PCR assays with true linear temperature gradients

Applied Biosystems™ VeriFlex™ System: True Temperature Control for PCR Protocols

Thermo Fisher Logo

Products

The Scientist Placeholder Image

Biotium Launches New Phalloidin Conjugates with Extended F-actin Staining Stability for Greater Imaging Flexibility

Leica Microsystems Logo

Latest AI software simplifies image analysis and speeds up insights for scientists

BioSkryb Genomics Logo

BioSkryb Genomics and Tecan introduce a single-cell multiomics workflow for sequencing-ready libraries in under ten hours

iStock

Agilent BioTek Cytation C10 Confocal Imaging Reader

agilent technologies logo