References
- Apple , E. 2005 . The Coming US Patent Opposition . Nat Biotechnol , 23 : 245 – 245 .
- Barker , D.G. 2005 . Troll or no Troll? Policing Patent Usage with an Open Post-Grant Review . Duke L. & Tech. Rev , : 9 – 10 .
- Barton , J. 2000 . Intellectual Property Rights. Reforming the Patent System . Science , 287 : 1933 – 1934 .
- Bulkeley , W.M. 2005 . Aggressive Patent Litigants Pose Growing Threat to Big Business . Wall St. J , Sept. 14, at A1
- Calmar Inc. v. Cook Chemical Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966). Decided together with Graham v. John Deere Co.
- Caulfield , T. , Cook-Deegan , R.M. , Kieff , F.S. and Walsh , J.P. 2006 . Evidence and Anecdotes: Analysis of Human Gene Patenting Controversies . Nature Biotechnology , 24 : 1091 – 1094 .
- Change.Gov Available http://change.gov/agenda/technology_agenda/
- Cockburn I.M. Kortum S. Stern S. (2003) Are All Patent Examiners Equal? Examiners, Patent Characteristics and Litigation Outcomes in in (Cohen W.M. and Merrill, S eds) Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy 285. -Available at http://books.nap.edu/book/0309086361/html/285.htm1#pagetop in which Cockburn et. al. find that the CAFC went from upholding the plaintiff in about 60 percent of cases to finding for the plaintiff in only about 40% of cases in recent years
- Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy. (2004) A Patent System for the 21st Century. Washington DC: National Academy of Science Available http://lab.nap.edu/nap-cgi/discover.cgi?term=a%20patent%20system&restric=NAP
- Ebay Inc., ET AL., Petitioners v MerEchange, L.L.C. 547 U.S. (2006)
- Federal Trade Commission. (2003). To Promote Innovation: The Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy. Available http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/10/innovationrpt.pdf
- Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966)
- Heller , M. and Eisenberg , R.S. 1998 . Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research . Science , 280 : 698 – 701 .
- Holman , C.M. 2006 . “ Biotechnology's Prescription for Patent Reform ” . In 5 J. Marshall Rev Intell Prop L , 317 – 319 . Spring .
- Jeffe , A.B. and Lerner , J. 2004 . Innovation And Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System Is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What To Do About It , Princeton N.J at 2 : Princeton University Press .
- KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. et al 127 S. Ct. 1727, 2007
- Lemley, M. and Sampet, B.N. (2007). Is the Patent Office a Rubber Stamp? Standford Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper Series. July, available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=999098#PaperDownload
- Madey v. Duke University, 307 F. 3d 1351, 1362(Fed Cir. 2002), cert denied, 123 S. Ct. 2639 (2003)
- McDermontt, W. (2007) The Patent System is Broken, post.gazette.com, July 27, Available http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07208/804719–109.stm
- Mills, A. Tereskerz, P. (2008). Proposed Patent Reform Legislation: Limitations of Empirical Data to Inform the Public Policy Debate. Available http://bio.org/ip/domestic/UVa_limitations_of_Empirical_data.pdf
- Organizing for America, Available http://www.barackobama.com/issues/technology/
- National Institutes of Health. (1999) Policy on Research Tools. Available http://ott.od.nih.gov/policy/policies_and_guidelines.html
- National Research Council. (2006) Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein Research and Innovation. Reaping the Benefits of Genomic and Protemic Research: Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, and Public Health. Washington D.C.: National Academies Press Available http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11487.html?onpi_newsdoc11172005
- Patent Reform Act of 2007, Available H.R. 1908 [110th]: Patent Reform Act of 2007 (GovTrack.us)
- Patent Reform Act of 2009, Available S. 515: Patent Reform Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)
- Pressman et.al. (2006) Patenting and Licensing Practices for DNA Based Patents at US Academic Institutions. Nature Biotechnology 24, 31–39.
- Shapiro, C. (2001) Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting. In A. Jeffe, J. Lerner and S. Stern, eds. Innovation Policy and the Economy. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=273550
- Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
- Sullivan, J.D. and Loretto, D. (2004) Symbol Technologies v. Lemelson: Prosecution Laches, and the Unmet Challenge of Junking “Junk Patents” 86 J Pat & Trademark Off Soc'y (September), 748–757.
- United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39 (1966)
- United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2001) Utility Guidelines, 66 Fed. Reg. 1092.
- United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2006). Press Release. Fiscal Year 2006: A Record-Breaking Year for the USPTO: Patent and trademark quality best on record in over 20 years Available http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/06–73.htm
- United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2007) Examination Guidelines for Determining Obviousness Under 35 U.S.C. 103 in View of the Supreme Court Decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. 72 Fed. Reg. 57526.
- Walsh, J.P., Arora, A. and Cohen, W. (2003). Effects of Research Tool Patents and Licensing on Biomedical Innovation, in (Cohen W.M. and Merrill, S eds) Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy 285. -Available at http://books.nap.edu/book/0309086361/html/285.htm1#pagetop
- Whittemore v. Cutter, 29 F. Cas. 1120 1121 (C.C.D. Mass 1813)