Research On The Patentability Of EST

The rapid development of gene technology has provided a new technical support forhuman beings to solve the outstanding problems of the environment, food, energy and others.However, gene technology brings good and it also brings challenges, expressed sequencetag(EST) of gene technology, for example. From the time EST were manufactured and named,whether gene expressed sequence tags should be granted a patent has been concerns and hotlydebated in biology and intellectual property community. As gene technology is different fromthe "non-active" science and technology, its own particularity challenges the patentabilitytheme of the traditional patent system.With the rapid development of gene technology, whether gene expressed sequence tagshould be patented or not has become an increasingly prominent issue. At the same time, asthe world’s first biotechnology patents country, United States, a gene expressed sequence tagspatent litigation undoubtedly causes the concern of the biology as well as the intellectualproperty community. The case is Fisher v. United States Patent and Trademark Office of geneexpression tags invention patent litigation in2005.In this paper, we take the Fisher v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office gene expressedsequence tags invention patent case as the starting point and analyze the patentability of geneexpressed sequence tags. We also introduce and compare the theory and practice of geneexpressed sequence tags patentability of the United States, European Union, Japan and othercountries. Finally, we put forward helpful suggestions for the theory building of geneexpressed sequence tags patentability in China by analyzing and researching ESTpatentability cases.This paper consists of five parts in addition to the introduction and conclusion.Part I: Introduction of Fisher v. United States Patent and Trademark Office Appeal Boardcase，including the cause of action, the basic facts of the case as well as the point ofcontention between the parties. The point of the case focus on whether gene expressed sequence tags meet the patentability theme, and whether gene expressed sequence tags meet"three characteristics" of patent law.Part II: The conception, particularity and application of EST.Part III: EST patentability comparation. Comparing the situation of EST patentabilityexamination in The United States, Europe, and Japan in the EST, introducing development ofthe United States EST patentability.Part IV: Drawing qualitative conclusions by analyzing the Judgment. Getting conclusionsby analyzing the "three characteristics" of EST and Public adequacy in this case; analyzingthe reason why they weren’t authorized.Part V: Recommendations on the theory building of gene expressed sequence tagspatentability in China. Combined with the previous part of the discourse, we compare the ESTpatentability examination in China and America, and analyze our problem. Then, we getrecommendations on the theory building of gene expressed sequence tags patentability inChina.