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 *

366 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20615184)

  • 1. Strategies for strengthening patent protection of pharmaceutical inventions in light of federal court decisions.
    Pillai X; Kinney WA
    Curr Top Med Chem; 2010; 10(18):1929-36. PubMed ID: 20615184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Avoiding hindsight in non-obviousness determination: case law review of pharmaceutical patents and guidance from the KSR v Teleflex decision.
    Dhulap S; Kulkarni MG
    Expert Opin Ther Pat; 2021 Oct; 31(10):951-963. PubMed ID: 33993810
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Nonobviousness of pharmaceutical inventions: implications for patent prosecution and litigation.
    Dhulap S; Kulkarni M
    Pharm Pat Anal; 2019 Jul; 8(4):91-107. PubMed ID: 31414965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc.: no obvious changes for the biotechnology market.
    Hinneschiedt CH
    Yale J Biol Med; 2007 Dec; 80(4):153-7. PubMed ID: 18449391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. KSR v. Teleflex. Part 1: Impact of U.S Supreme Court Patent Law on Canadian intellectual property and regulatory rights landscape.
    Bouchard RA
    Health Law J; 2007; 15():221-46. PubMed ID: 19702184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. What is your reasonable expectation of success in obtaining pharmaceutical or biotechnology patents having nonobvious claimed inventions that the courts will uphold? An overview of obviousness court decisions.
    Pereira DJ; Kunin SG
    Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2014 Dec; 5(4):. PubMed ID: 25475106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. DNA patentability--anything but obvious.
    Dillen JS
    Wis L Rev; 1997; 5():1023-46. PubMed ID: 16329221
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Identification of the factors that result in obviousness rulings for biotech patents: an updated analysis of the US Federal Circuit decisions after KSR.
    Lin F; Wang SJ
    Hum Vaccin Immunother; 2013 Nov; 9(11):2490-5. PubMed ID: 23899509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Patentability of Stem Cells in the United States.
    Fendrick SE; Zuhn DL
    Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2015 Aug; 5(12):. PubMed ID: 26292987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Stem cell patents--reexamination/litigation--the last 5 years.
    Shyntum Y; Kalkreuter E
    Tissue Eng Part B Rev; 2009 Mar; 15(1):87-90. PubMed ID: 19260807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Competition policy in patent cases and antitrust.
    Sobel G
    Adv Genet; 2003; 50():23-64; discussion 507-10. PubMed ID: 14714685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pharmaceutical patent life-cycle management after KSR v. Teleflex.
    Furrow ME
    Food Drug Law J; 2008; 63(1):275-320. PubMed ID: 18561462
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Take off your genes and let the doctor have a look: why the Mayo and Myriad decisions have invalidated method claims for genetic diagnostic testing.
    Bergin C
    Am Univ Law Rev; 2013; 63(1):173-217. PubMed ID: 25335200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Using the written description requirement to limit broad patent scope, allow competition, and encourage innovation in biotechnology.
    Mull WC
    Health Matrix Clevel; 2004; 14(2):393-435. PubMed ID: 15503695
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Patentability of genetically engineered microorganisms.
    Cooper A
    JAMA; 1983 Mar; 249(12):1553-4. PubMed ID: 6338261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Patent protection of diagnostic technology: will recent US Supreme Court decisions change patent strategy?
    Komatani TS
    Pharm Pat Anal; 2015; 4(5):357-62. PubMed ID: 26451906
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Must an inventor "possess" an invention to patent it?
    Woessner WD; Chadwick RA
    Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2014 Sep; 4(11):a020867. PubMed ID: 25237144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Inventions in biotechnology and the assessment of obviousness.
    Finney K
    Australas Biotechnol; 1994; 4(5):280-3. PubMed ID: 7765674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz: availability of generic glatiramer acetate and the impact to patent litigation claim construction.
    Fogel LE; Ray CJ
    Expert Opin Ther Pat; 2015 Jan; 25(1):1-4. PubMed ID: 25363310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 19.