265 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15956627)
41. The stem-cell market - patents and the pursuit of scientific progress.
Murray F
N Engl J Med; 2007 Jun; 356(23):2341-3. PubMed ID: 17554114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
42. Robert Stoll. Interview by Charlotte Harrison.
Stoll R
Nat Rev Drug Discov; 2009 Dec; 8(12):926. PubMed ID: 19949397
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
43. Intellectual property. NIH roils academe with advice on licensing DNA patents.
Malakoff D
Science; 2004 Mar; 303(5665):1757-8. PubMed ID: 15031474
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
44. Encouraging further innovation: Ariad v. Eli Lilly and the written description requirement.
Jakas J
Seton Hall Law Rev; 2012; 42(3):1287-36. PubMed ID: 22803220
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
45. NIH panel urges technology transfer reforms.
Swan N
Nat Biotechnol; 1998 Aug; 16(8):710. PubMed ID: 9702758
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
46. The Bayh-Dole Act: a model for promoting research translation?
Loewenberg S
Mol Oncol; 2009 Apr; 3(2):91-3. PubMed ID: 19383372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
47. Obviousness, hindsight and perspective: the impact of KSR v. Teleflex on biotech and pharmaceutical patents.
Teitelbaum R; Cohen M
Nat Biotechnol; 2007 Oct; 25(10):1105-6. PubMed ID: 17921990
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
48. US courts narrow patent exemptions.
Fox JL
Nat Biotechnol; 2003 Aug; 21(8):834. PubMed ID: 12894182
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
49. Protection for manufacturing, not research.
Nat Rev Drug Discov; 2003 Oct; 2(10):766. PubMed ID: 14579809
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
50. The ITC as an attractive patent litigation forum for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry.
Burton CA; Margonis LE
Pharm Pat Anal; 2013 Mar; 2(2):177-80. PubMed ID: 24237023
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
51. Proposed changes to patent code loom over biotech industry.
Coombs A
Nat Biotechnol; 2007 Dec; 25(12):1333-4. PubMed ID: 18066010
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
52. Cabilly patent finale.
Waltz E
Nat Biotechnol; 2008 Aug; 26(8):846. PubMed ID: 18688222
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
53. Technology transfer: The leap to industry.
Wapner J
Nature; 2016 May; 533(7601):S13-5. PubMed ID: 27144603
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
54. Biotechnology--a challenge to the patent system.
Farnley S; Morey-Nase P; Sternfeld D
Curr Opin Biotechnol; 2004 Jun; 15(3):254-7. PubMed ID: 15193336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
55. Global biotech expansion taking cues from Bayh-Dole.
Howard K
Nat Biotechnol; 2004 Jul; 22(7):919-20. PubMed ID: 15259190
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
56. Towards new standards in university-industry collaboration.
Nature; 2001 Jun; 411(6839):723. PubMed ID: 11459023
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
57. Intellectual property. Decision on NFkappaB patent could have broad implications for biotech.
Garber K
Science; 2006 May; 312(5775):827. PubMed ID: 16690824
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
58. Roche faces charges over Taq patent claim.
Abbott A
Nature; 1996 Aug; 382(6593):660. PubMed ID: 8751427
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
59. Licensing biotech intellectual property in university-industry partnerships.
Drozdoff V; Fairbairn D
Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2015 Jan; 5(3):a021014. PubMed ID: 25605752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. Justices expand rights to experiment with patented drugs.
Pollack A
N Y Times Web; 2005 Jun; ():C1, C8. PubMed ID: 15966121
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
