Applications for Process Patents: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, Second Session, on H.R. 4307 ... May 5, 1994
United States, United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1994 - 88 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
activity administration allow amend American Association believe benefit bill biotech biotechnology industry catalyst cell Chairman charge chemical clear companies competition competitors concern Congress considered continue Counsel court create deal Durden effect enacted enforce engineering examiners example exist fact Federal Circuit filed follows foreign FRANK genetic going granted hearing House HUGHES important infringement innovation Intellectual Property invention inventor issue KIRK legislation look manufacture microprocessor MOORHEAD MOSSINGHOFF nonobvious novel object obtain obviousness owner particular Patent and Trademark patent applications patent law Patent Office patent protection pharmaceutical Pleuddemann practice present problem process claims process patent protein question Raines requirements resolve result SENATE situation SMITH specific starting materials STATEMENT statute Subcommittee testimony Thank tion U.S. patent unexamined unfair United University valid WATERMAN
Page 38 - Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. "I*b be great is to be misunderstood^ I suppose no man can violate his nature.
Page 38 - Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood ? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.
Page 24 - In that they failed to state sufficient to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the invention...
Page 74 - ... [T]he fact that new or old, obvious or nonobvious, materials are used or result from the process are only factors to be considered, rather than conclusive indicators of the obviousness or nonobviousness of a claimed...
Page 47 - ... isolating desired polypeptide products of the expression of DNA sequences in said vector. 706 F. Supp. at 108, 9 USPQ2d at 1845. ^'HR 3957, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990); HR 5664, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. (1990); S. 298, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993); HR 760, 103d Cong., 1st Sess. (1993). See I. McAndrews, Removing the Burden of Durden through Legislation: HR 3957 and HR 5664, J.
Page 14 - Further, no remedy is available if the product was materially changed by subsequent processes or if it becomes a trivial and nonessential component of another product.
Page 30 - The court also reviews the decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico. The Supreme Court may decide which of the cases under its appellate jurisdiction it will review. Because it cannot possibly review all the cases, it selects the ones it considers the most important The court agrees to hear a case by granting a writ of certiorari (pronounced...
Page 74 - Pleuddemann that an old process for using a new material is patentable by virtue of the properties of the patentable material or product employed. In Ex parte Ochiai,331 the Board has also rejected the Federal Circuit's en banc admonition that Durden is not authority to reject as obvious every method claim reading on an old type of process,332 considering the court's statement to be dictum inapplicable to methods of making compounds.333 In Ochiai, the Board considered claims to a process of making...