Saturday, July 01, 2006

Work of Ariff Bongso as prior art to Thomson patents?

There is a suggestion by John M. Simpson [Stem Cell Project Director
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights] that prior work of Ariff Bongso might invalidate, through obviousness, the stem cell patents of Thomson, now held by WARF.

In 1994, Bongso (an IVF researcher) used human fallopian tube cells as a medium to grow human stem cells. He reached only the second generation. James Thomson of Wisconsin used mouse feeder cells and grew 40 generations.

IPBiz suggests noting the year (1994) and asking whether the negative results of Bongso (obtained outside the US) were published.


John M. Simpson also passed along the following news item from the Thursday, June 29 issue of the Wisconsin State Journal:



Text -->

In a guest column on Monday [June 26], John Simpson of the California-based
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights argued that the Wisconsin Alumni
Research Foundation [WARF] is impeding life-saving research.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Wisconsin is the birthplace of stem-cell research, and WARF has done
everything it can to further research on this important discovery.
WiCell, WARF 's nonprofit subsidiary dedicated to stem-cell research, has provided
royalty-free licenses to more than 300 research groups around the
world, including 54 who are already working with our cells in California

WiCell also has provided training in basic stem-cell culture
techniques and provides follow-up technical support to more than 350 scientists, who
collaborate with WiCell scientists on a daily basis.

Dr. Jason Owen-Smith of the University of Michigan recently
published an analysis of all human embryonic stem cell research articles published
in the world between 2002 and 2005, revealing that 67 percent of those
articles cited WiCell's stem-cell lines in their research.


But CIRM wants to use Wisconsin's patented stem-cell lines and
methodology not just for pure research purposes, which they are welcome to do, but
also for commercial development, which they can only do if they honor the
appropriate requirements of U.S. patent law. [IPBiz notes that everyone is still ignoring the Supreme Court case of Merck v. Integra on the interpretation of 35 USC 271(e)(1).]


They also understand that the essential research they are doing must
be funded and that patents are one important way of making sure the giants
of discovery, such as UW-Madison's James Thomson, have the financing they
need to continue their work. So do we.


See a July 5 entry on californiastemcellreport "WARF Smacks..."


Post a Comment

<< Home