Stem cells ready for extraction from a five-day-old embyoThe U.S. patent office has invalidated some key stem-cell patents, a significant move that could shake up a potentially huge market for embryonic stem-cell therapies that may one day restore all kinds of body parts for the sick and injured.

Yesterday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a preliminary decision to invalidate three fundamental stem-cell patents held by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), the technology-transfer arm of the University of Wisconsin. Last year, two public-interest groups asked the patent office to re-examine those patents, arguing that they should never have been issued because their descriptions of human embryonic stem cells and the process for deriving them weren’t new. The patent office effectively agreed, finding that previous scientific publications and patents undermined WARF’s claimed innovations (decisions here, here and here (PDF), courtesy of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights).

WARF and its primary stem-cell business partner, Geron, have long used these patents to claim a monopoly of sorts over just about any therapy or diagnostic test that might emerge from stem-cell work. (WARF and Geron even tussled briefly in an acrimonious legal spat five years ago that ultimately led to a dramatic narrowing of Geron’s exclusive commercial rights over the cells.) Many academic researchers argue that the patents have had a chilling effect on stem-cell research, and some companies have complained about the cost of licensing them as well. Invitrogen, for instance, said it moved its stem-cell work overseas where the WARF patents don’t apply.

So the invalidation of the WARF patents could have a significant, albeit unpredictable, effect on the nascent science of stem cells. Some academic research might move ahead more quickly, although the relative paucity of major support from government or Big Pharma has so far presented a much bigger impediment to the work. On the commercial side, Geron could lose its remaining exclusive rights to derived neural, pancreatic and heart cells, leaving would-be competitors such as Novocell free to forge ahead — although David Greenwood, Geron’s chief financial officer, says the company’s own patent estate should shield it in that respect.

In fact, though, it may be years before anyone knows how this will all turn out. WARF said it will defend its patent claims “vigorously,” and has Geron’s support. The foundation will first argue its case directly with the patent examiner, and if that fails, will likely take its argument to a patent-appeal board. Even that board’s decision won’t be final, though, since WARF can always turn to the courts. At least by the time the process plays out, stem-cell science may have progressed far enough for us to know if all this arguing was really worth it in the first place.

The NYT has more info here.

Tags: , , ,

8 Comments

  1. April 3rd, 2007
    10:41 am

    Richard said:

    Maybe Im failing to see the alternative definition here but you might want to consider changing the title of this article…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chink

  2. April 3rd, 2007
    11:08 am

    David Hamilton said:

    Wikipedia, unfortunately, is a much better encyclopedia than it is a dictionary. I certainly didn\’t intend the word \”chink\” in any offensive sense, just in its common usage as a crack or a narrow opening. See here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chink

  3. April 3rd, 2007
    11:19 am

    Alaska Miller said:

    chink means crack: ie. chink in the armor.

    If you think a word is racist, maybe you’re the racist?

  4. April 3rd, 2007
    11:20 am

    Vishal said:

    According to Merriam-Webster
    Etymology: probably alteration of Middle English chine crack, fissure
    1 : a small cleft, slit, or fissure
    2 : a weak spot that may leave one vulnerable

  5. April 3rd, 2007
    2:13 pm

    la said:

    definitely stood out in my rss reader :)

  6. April 4th, 2007
    8:59 am

    Marcus said:

    Got my attention.. I thought maybe he meant Kink.. Hah.

  7. April 4th, 2007
    10:26 am

    commonsense said:

    When I read the title of this piece, the first thoughts in my mind: (1). How come such offensive slurs shows up in this website? (2). The word “chink” must have some other less commonly used meanings, — it is confirmed that when I check wikipedia.

    So what does it tell us? For me, the author of the article knows both (1) and (2) of my thoughts, and he still wants to use such term to stir up attentions, if not emotions.

    Given the diversified environment in Silicon Valley, my comments are:
    (1). It’s in bad taste, and probably with a little bit cowardice.
    (2). It won’t do any good to the readers, and will likely to paint this web site a piece of racisms.
    (3). Let’s hope that Matt Mashall can help us to do some sanity check in the future to avoid this kind of unpleasant reading experience.

  8. June 6th, 2007
    7:09 pm

    RickM70 said:

    “Chink” in this sense is not referring to those people of Chinese descent. Instead, the author is referring to a small crack, fissure, hole, or unprotected spot. I believe a better word could have been found, however, the use of the word “chink” in this instance, is not wrong.

    From Shakespeare’s “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”:
    “And such a wall, as I would have you think,
    That had in it a crannied hole or chink,
    Through which the lovers, Pyramus and Thisby,
    Did whisper often very secretly.

Add a Comment