WIPO-UKRAINE SUMMER SCHOOL ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – JULY 2011

1. WIPO-UKRAINE SUMMER SCHOOL ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – JULY 2011 Selected Cases on Patents and Biotechnology

2. Programme • The oncomouse • Relaxin • WARF

3. Oncomouse • Transgenic mouse susceptible to cancer – by introducing an oncogene • Issues • Should patents be granted? • What are moral implications • Consequences of differnet decisions from different offices

4. Relaxin • Application for gene coding of second unexpected form of human relaxin and for cloned synthetic form • Is invention novel? • Is there an inventive step? • Is patent contrary to morality? • Is this “patenting life”

5. WARF • Application relating to human stem cells refused on moral grounds and referred to enlarged board of appeal

6. WARF – 2 • EPO Rules • Rule 23(d) “Under Article 53(a), European patents shall not be granted in respect of biotechnological inventions which, in particular, concern the following: ..........(c) uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes; • Art. 53(a) prevents the grant of patents in respect of inventions the exploitation of which would be contrary to morality.

7. WARF - 3 • Questions • Does EPC rule 23 apply to applications filed before rule enters into force • If yes does rule forbid products produced by destruction of embryos (latter not part of claims) • If no to above does EPC Rule 53 forbid such patenting • Is fact that after date of filing such products can be obtained without destruction of embryos