In re Bergy case brief summary
596 F.2d 952 (1979)
CASE FACTS
Appellants, two patent applicants, sought review of the decisions of the board of patent appeals that affirmed the PTO's rejection of their product patent claims on the basis that living organisms were not covered as patentable subject-matter under either the "manufacture" or "composition of matter" categories of 35 U.S.C.S. § 101. The first patent appealed involved a novel process for preparing the antibiotic lincomycin by using a previously unknown microorganism in a biologically pure culture. The second patent involved the invention of a new genetically engineered strain of bacteria for the more effective degradation of oil spills.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court reversed, holding that the appealed claims were clearly patentable subject matter within the contemplation of Congress in enacting the pertinent statute; in construing the statute to include living organisms, the court was not expanding the patent laws.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
596 F.2d 952 (1979)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellants, two separate patent
applicants, sought review of decisions of the Board of Patent Appeals
for the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) affirming
PTO's rejection of their respective product patent claims on the
basis that living organisms were not patentable subject matter
under 35 U.S.C.S. § 101.CASE FACTS
Appellants, two patent applicants, sought review of the decisions of the board of patent appeals that affirmed the PTO's rejection of their product patent claims on the basis that living organisms were not covered as patentable subject-matter under either the "manufacture" or "composition of matter" categories of 35 U.S.C.S. § 101. The first patent appealed involved a novel process for preparing the antibiotic lincomycin by using a previously unknown microorganism in a biologically pure culture. The second patent involved the invention of a new genetically engineered strain of bacteria for the more effective degradation of oil spills.
DISCUSSION
- On both these patents, process claims were allowed, but patenting of the microorganisms themselves was rejected.
- The court reversed, holding that the appealed claims clearly defined subject matter that Congress contemplated would be covered within the categories enunciated by 35 U.S.C.S. § 101.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed, holding that the appealed claims were clearly patentable subject matter within the contemplation of Congress in enacting the pertinent statute; in construing the statute to include living organisms, the court was not expanding the patent laws.
Suggested Study Aids and Books
No comments:
Post a Comment