Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Patents
  • Published:

The 'real world' utility of miRNA patents: lessons learned from expressed sequence tags

Nature Biotechnology volume 29, pages 129–133 (2011)Cite this article

Subjects

Strategies are needed for drafting miRNA patent applications, in light of the existing patent landscape and genomic patent strategies of the past decades.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Fire, A. et al. Nature 391, 806–811 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. He, L. & Hannon, G.J. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 522–531 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Townley-Tilson, W.H., Callis, T.E. & Wang, D. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 42, 1252–1255 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Zheng, K. et al. J. Neurosci. 30, 8245–8250 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jones, C.I. & Newbury, S.F. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 38, 1137–1143 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Letzen, B.S. et al. PLoS ONE 5, e10480 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Almanza, G. et al. PLoS ONE 5, e11243 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Yu, Z. et al. Am. J. Pathol. 176, 1058–1064 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cho, W.C. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1805, 209–217 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hime, G.R. & Somers, W.G. Cell Adh. Migr. 3, 425–432 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Weber, M., Baker, M.B., Moore, J.P. & Searles, C.D. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 393, 643–648 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Elia, L. et al. Cell Death Differ. 16, 1590–1598 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Huang, Z.P., Neppl, R.L. & Wang, D.Z. J. Cardiovasc. Transl. Res. 3, 212–218 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Adams, B.D., Furneaux, H. & White, B.A. Mol. Endocrinol. 21, 1132–1147 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sullivan, C.S. & Ganem, D. Mol. Cell 20, 3–7 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lecellier, C.-H. et al. Science 308, 557–560 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Taganov, K.D., Boldin, M.P., Chang, K.-J. & Baltimore, D. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103, 12481–12486 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Taganov, K.D., Boldin, M.P. & Baltimore, D. Immunity 26, 133–137 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Davis, P., Kelley, J.J., Caltrider, S.P. & Heinig, S.J. Nat. Biotechnol. 23, 1227–1229 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. US 11/747,409, Office Action dated February 13, 2009.

  21. US 11/747,409, Reply to Office Action dated August 3, 2009; Cf. In re Fisher, 421 F.3d 1365, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

  22. EP 02782801, Examiner's Report dated July 28, 2009.

  23. Id.

  24. <http://www.alnylam.com/Business-Development/Academic-Federal-and-Foundation-Collaborations.php>

  25. 12/550,602, issued as US Patent No. 7,838,663 on November 23, 2010 (claims directed to miRNA-125a and 125b sequences); 12/550,586, issued as US Patent No. 7,838,661 on November 23, 2010 (claims directed to miRNA-124 sequences); 12/550, 704, issued as US Patent No. 7,838,664 on November 23, 2010 (claims directed to miRNA-142 sequences); 12/550,596, issued as US Patent No. 7,838,662 on November 23, 2010 (claims directed to miRNA-15a, 15b and 16 sequences); 12/550,579, issued as US Patent No. 7,838,660 on November 23, 2010 (claims directed to miRNA155 sequences).

  26. 35 USC §101.

  27. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107; “Utility Examination Guidelines,” Fed. Regist. 66, 1092–1099 (2001).

  28. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107.01; see also Fisher, 421 F.3d at 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

  29. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107.01.

  30. Davis, et al. at n. 19; see also Overview of Comments in “Utility Examination Guidelines”. Fed. Regist. 66, 1092–1099 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Reynolds, T. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92, 96–97 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107.01(I)(A).

  33. In re: Kirk, 376 F.2d 936 (CCPA 1967).

  34. Reynolds at n. 30.

  35. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107.01(I)(B).

  36. Nelson v. Bowler, 626 F.2d 853 (CCPA 1980).

  37. MPEP at n. 34.

  38. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure §2107.02(III)(B).

  39. Id.

  40. Rasmusson v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 75 USPQ 1297, 1300 (Fed. Cir. 2005), quoting Envirotech Corp. v. Al George, Inc., 221 USPQ 473 (Fed. Cir. 1984).

  41. Rasmusson, at 1300.

  42. 421 F.3d 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

  43. d. at 1374.

  44. Id.

  45. 421 F. 3d 1376.

  46. Storella, J. A Bioinformatics Business Model and the Bold Strategy Behind It: The Case of Incyte Genomics, The American Conference Institute, 5th Advanced Forum on Biotech Patents (Sept. 2005). <http://www.wsgr.com/attorneys/NEWBIOS/PDFs/storella0905.pdf>

  47. Schultz, J.D. Patenting Interfering RNA, SPE Art Unit 1635, USPTO (date unknown). <http://www.cabic.com/bcp/061307/JSchultz_PIRNA.ppt>

  48. Smalheiser, N.R. & Torvil, V.I. in MicroRNA Protocols (ed. Ying, S.-Y.) 115–127 (Humana Press, 2006).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Rasmusson at n. 40.

  50. Maragkakis, M. et al. BMC Bioinformatics 10, 295–304 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Kunin, S.G., Nagumo, M., Stanton, B., Therkorn, L.S. & Walsh, S. Am. Univ. Law Rev. 51, 609–638 (2002).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. 35 USC §112 (2001).

  53. Kunin et al. at n. 50.

  54. Vas-Cath Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d 1555, 1563–64 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

  55. US 10/909,125, Notice of Allowability dated October 22, 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bonnie W. McLeod and Erich Veitenheimer are partners, Mark L. Hayman is an associate attorney and Angela L. Purcell and Joshua S. Marcus are patent agents at Cooley LLP, Washington, DC, USA.,

    Bonnie W McLeod, Mark L Hayman, Angela L Purcell, Joshua S Marcus & Erich Veitenheimer

Authors
  1. Bonnie W McLeod
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark L Hayman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Angela L Purcell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joshua S Marcus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Erich Veitenheimer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bonnie W McLeod.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

MiRagen, a company active in the microRNA space, is a Cooley patent prosecution client; and B.V.M. and E.V. previously represented the Carnegie Institution of Washington for the Andrew Fire/Craig Mello portfolio directed to RNAi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McLeod, B., Hayman, M., Purcell, A. et al. The 'real world' utility of miRNA patents: lessons learned from expressed sequence tags. Nat Biotechnol 29, 129–133 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1765

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1765

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing