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 *

316 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11662894)

  • 1. Patents--patentable subject matter--living man-made organisms held to be patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. Section 101.
    Day MT
    Marquette Law Rev; 1980; 63(4):711-30. PubMed ID: 11662894
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Patenting of life forms.
    Pautler G
    Trial; 1982 Apr; 18(4):47-50, 76. PubMed ID: 11649513
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Patenting animals and other living things.
    O'Connor KW
    South Calif Law Rev; 1991 Nov; 65(1):597-621. PubMed ID: 11645846
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Recombinant DNA: a case study in regulation of scientific research.
    Chalfant JC; Hartmann ME; Blakeboro A
    Ecol Law Q; 1979; 8(1):55-129. PubMed ID: 11665069
    [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. All animals are equal, but some are better than others: patenting transgenic animals.
    Mark DA
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1991; 7():245-68. PubMed ID: 11645691
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. The regulation of recombinant DNA research: the alternative of local control.
    Rosenblatt DP
    Boston Coll Environ Aff Law Rev; 1982; 10(1):37-78. PubMed ID: 11649694
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Patent law: live, human-made microorganisms are patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. Sect. 101--Diamond v. Chakrabarty.
    Namei FT
    Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1980; 49(4):902-13. PubMed ID: 11650489
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Beyond Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Quigg: the controversy over transgenic animal patents continues.
    Hecht EJ
    Am Univ Law Rev; 1992; 41(3):1023-74. PubMed ID: 11652629
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Regulating the environmental release of genetically engineered organisms: Foundation on Economic Trends v. Heckler.
    Pendorf S
    Fla State Univ Law Rev; 1985; 12(4):891-921. PubMed ID: 11653640
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. Chakrabarty: tempest in a test tube.
    Green HP
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1980 Oct; 10(5):12-3. PubMed ID: 11643615
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. New criteria for patentable subject matter: microorganisms and computer-related technology.
    Greenlee LL
    Brooklyn Law Rev; 1980; 47(1):43-66. PubMed ID: 11650569
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Implications of the abortion decisions: post Roe and Doe litigation and legislation.
    Wasserman R
    Columbia Law Rev; 1974 Mar; 74(2):237-68. PubMed ID: 11664412
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Genetic tests: safe enough?
    Bomboy RP; Rodgers J
    Parade; 1979; 13 May 1979():15-16. PubMed ID: 12085888
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.