Sunday, 15 November 2009

Fighting back against gene patents in 2009


This year the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Association for Molecular Pathology have led a court challenge to the legality of the U.S. Patent Office practice of granting patents on genes.

COMPLAINT against United States Patent and Trademark Office, Myriad Genetics, Lorris Betz, Roger Boyer, Jack Brittain, Arnold B. Combe, Raymond Gesteland, James U. Jensen, John Kendall Morris, Thomas Parks, David W. Pershing, Michael K. Young. (Filing Fee $ 350.00, Receipt Number 687779)Document filed by American Society For Clinical Pathology, College of American Pathologists, Association For Molecular Pathology, Haig Kazazian, Arupa Ganguly, Wendy Chung, Harry Ostrer, David Ledbetter, Stephen Warren, Ellen Matloff, Elsa Reich, Breast Cancer Action, Boston Women's Health Book Collective, American College of Medical Genetics, Lisbeth Ceriani, Runi Limary, Genae Girard, Patrice Fortune, Vicky Thomason, Kathleen Raker.(ama) (Entered: 05/12/2009)

According to the ACLU on 2 November 2009 and WebWire on 3 November 2009:

Several major organizations, including the American Medical Association, the March of Dimes and the American Society for Human Genetics, filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the challenge to the patents on the BRCA genes.

and

The court noted the significance of this case. The court's opinion stated, "The widespread use of gene sequence information as the foundation for biomedical research means that resolution of these issues will have far-reaching implications, not only for gene-based health care and the health of millions of women facing the specter of breast cancer, but also for the future course of biomedical research… The novel circumstances presented by this action against the USPTO, the absence of any remedy provided in the Patent Act, and the important constitutional rights the Plaintiffs seek to vindicate establish subject matter jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs' claim against the USPTO".

This case has survived a plaintiff's motion to dismiss and is going forward.

With patents now being held on approximately 20 per cent of identified human genes, this court case is of more than passing interest.

No comments: