These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11662783)

  • 1. Test-tube life: Reg. U.S. Pat. Off.
    DeMott JS; Thomas E
    Time; 1980 Jun; 115(26):52-53. PubMed ID: 11662783
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Where was Chakrabarty's bug?
    Science; 1989 May; 244(4907):919. PubMed ID: 11644372
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. New life forms: a clear road ahead?
    US News World Rep; 1980 Jun; 88(25):34-5. PubMed ID: 11661843
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Innocuous inoculum or perilous parasite? Encouraging genetic research through patent grants: a call for regulation and debate.
    Brashear JF
    San Diego Law Rev; 1981 Mar; 18(2):263-99. PubMed ID: 11650644
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The right to patent life.
    Press Ae
    Newsweek; 1980 Jun; 45(26):74-5. PubMed ID: 11662860
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Patent decision fuels genetic research debate.
    Podgers J
    Am Bar Assoc J; 1980 Aug; 66():943-4. PubMed ID: 11662811
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Patenting life.
    Kass LR
    Commentary; 1981 Dec; 72(6):45-57. PubMed ID: 11649383
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Patenting life is no guarantee of success.
    Yanchinski S
    New Sci; 1980 Jun; 86(1207):373. PubMed ID: 11664063
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Patent law--patent on life form--man-made modification of microorganism is patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 100 S.Ct. 2204 (1980).
    Vidas S
    Hamline Law Rev; 1981 Jan; 4(2):341-50. PubMed ID: 11650724
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patents--a live man-made micro-organism is patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. Section 101.
    Fowler CF
    Drake Law Rev; 1980-1981; 30(3):635-49. PubMed ID: 11650556
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Diamond v. Chakrabarty: oil eaters--alive and patentable.
    Walsh DJ
    Pepperdine Law Rev; 1981; 8(3):747-81. PubMed ID: 11650496
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. An international comparative analysis of the patentability of recombinant DNA-derived organisms.
    Sparrow CN
    Univ Toledo Law Rev; 1981; 12(4):945-57. PubMed ID: 11649594
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Patent law--human-made, genetically engineered, living microorganism constitutes a "manufacture" or "composition of matter" under Title 35 U.S.C. Sect. 101--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 477 U.S. 303 (1980).
    Harris RR
    Miss Coll Law Rev; 1981 Jan; 2(2):161-73. PubMed ID: 11652412
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Multicellular vertebrate mammals as "patentable subject matter" under 35 U.S.C. Sect. 101: promotion of science and the useful arts or an open invitation for abuse?
    Landau MB
    Dickinson Law Rev; 1993; 97(2):203-26. PubMed ID: 11652689
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Live, human-made bacteria as patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101: Diamond v. Chakrabarty.
    Jensen BJ
    Brigh Young Univ Law Rev; 1980; 1980(3):705-19. PubMed ID: 11650474
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Proprietary rights and the norms of science in biotechnology research.
    Eisenberg RS
    Yale Law J; 1987 Dec; 97(2):177-231. PubMed ID: 11660398
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Patent law--man-made, living microorganisms held patentable subject matter under section 101 of the Patent Act--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980).
    Faggen N
    Temple Law Q; 1981; 54(2):308-30. PubMed ID: 11652407
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Diamond v. Chakrabarty: scientist patents micro-organism--life forms considered patentable subject matter.
    Kiernan JM
    Ohio North Univ Law Rev; 1980 Oct; 7(4):1038-51. PubMed ID: 11650472
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The patentability of living organisms under 35 U.S.C. Section 101: Parker v. Bergy (Parker v. Chakrabarty).
    Fitzgerald JP
    New Engl Law Rev; 1978; 15(2):379-405. PubMed ID: 11662838
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Microorganism patents.
    Behringer JW
    J Pat Off Soc; 1981 Mar; 63(3):128-37. PubMed ID: 11650632
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.