Title: Utility
1Utility Section 101
- 101. Whoever invents and new AND USEFUL machine,
manufacture, . . .
2Main Trouble Areas
- No known utility (perpetual motion machines)
- Newman v. Quigg, 877 F.2d 1575 11 USPQ2d 1340
(Fed. Cir. 1989) (claims to a perpetual motion
machine ruled inoperable) - Malicious utility
- a "useful" invention is one "which may be applied
to a beneficial use in society, in
contradistinction to an invention injurious to
the morals, health, or good order of society, or
frivolous and insignificant"
3Justice Story View
- Appendix, Note on the Patent Laws, 3 Wheat. 13,
24. See also Justice Story's decisions on circuit
in Lowell v. Lewis, 15 Fed. Cas. 1018 (No. 8568)
(C. C. D. Mass.), and Bedford v. Hunt, 3 Fed Cas.
37 (No. 1217) (C. C. D. Mass.).
4Brenner v Manson, p 229
- This is not to say that we mean to disparage the
importance of contributions to the fund of
scientific information short of the invention of
something "useful," or that we are blind to the
prospect that what now seems without "use" may
tomorrow command the grateful attention of the
public.
5Brenner, contd
- But a patent is not a hunting license. It is not
a reward for the search, but compensation for its
successful conclusion. "A patent system must be
related to the world of commerce rather than to
the realm of philosophy. "
6In re Brana 34 U.S.P.Q.2d 1436 C.A.Fed.
Decided March 30, 1995
7Brana, contd
8R1-R4 Markush groups
N Markush group
9Brana contd p. 245
- FDA approval, however, is not a prerequisite for
finding a compound useful within the meaning of
the patent laws. Usefulness in patent law, and in
particular in the context of pharmaceutical
inventions, necessarily includes the expectation
of further research and development.. Were we to
require Phase II testing in order to prove
utility, the associated costs would prevent many
companies from obtaining patent protection on
promising new inventions, thereby eliminating an
incentive to pursue, through research and
development, potential cures in many crucial
areas such as the treatment of cancer. - -- 34 U.S.P.Q.2d 1436, 1443
10Working Model or Prototype in vivo effectiveness
Promising Experimental Results Brenner v. Manson
Promising Clinical Results, e.g., in vitro In
re Brana
Project Initiation Pure Concept Stage
11The Oklahoma Land Rush A Good Use of Resources?
12(No Transcript)
13Mining Claim Systems Require-ments and Timing
Issues
14Some quick economics
- Terry L. Anderson Peter J. Hill, The Race for
Property Rights, 33 J.L. Econ. 177 (1990) - David D. Haddock, First Possession Versus Optimal
Timing Limiting the Dissipation of Economic
Value, 64 Wash. U. L.Q. 775 (1986). - Dean Lueck, The Rule of First Possession and the
Design of the Law, 38 J.L. Econ. 393 (1995)
15Terry L. Anderson Montana State Hoover
Institution
David Haddock, Northwestern Law School
16(No Transcript)
17Ex Parte Fischer
- Claim 1
- Substantially purified echoes of Parke-Davis
- Selected from the group consisting of . . .
- What is this claim form?
18Markush Group
- An article of clothing, selected from the group
consisting of - Shirts
- Shoes
- Pants
- A chemical entity selected from the group
consisting of - Carbon
- COOH
- CH(6)
19Expressed Sequence Tags
Most DNA Unknown Function
EST Short Tag
The good stuff DNA that codes for a protein
20Multiple Biotechnology Patents SNP/EST Example
A Owns SNP_1 (Or EST_1)
B Owns SNP_2/EST_2
C Owns SNP_3/EST_3
21Fischer
- What utilities are claimed? P. 3
- determining a relationship between a
polymorphism and a plant trait - isolating a genetic region . . . Or mapping
- determining protein levels . . .
22Fischer - holding
- P 22
- Immediate utility is to conduct further
experiments - Too attenuated under Brenner and Brana
23Expressed Sequence Tag Patents
- Bad Idea! Eisenberg Merges opinion letter, 1995
- Patent laws utility requirement bars these
patents - Why? Rent Seeking Dominates incentive motive
Transaction Costs a Major Issue
24Transaction Costs
B
C
A
Firm E
End Product
25Transaction Costs II
B
A
C
End Product
End Product
End Product