petri-dish-lid-and-hand
1 May 2010Biotechnology

What next for stem cell research?

When, in the course of case G2/06 (the WARF application), the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) was invited to seek the assistance of the Court of Justice (the court) in construing Article 6 of the Biotechnology Directive, it must have come as no surprise to observers that it declined this invitation. The enlarged board was not persuaded by the potential awkwardness of the court subsequently reaching an alternative view as to the patentability of embryonic stem cell lines.

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk


More on this story

Biotechnology
22 October 2025   Chuck Scholtz, head of IP at Verdiva Bio, shares the pressures of global filing strategies on tight budgets, why there’s no ‘right way’ to manage IP, and how to get the best results from external counsel relationships.
Biotechnology
2 September 2025   Erik Viik of Papula-Nevinpat looks at the dynamics that international applicants need to be aware of to secure and manage their patent rights across the region.
Biotechnology
12 June 2025   Judges uphold PTAB’s finding that two Agilent patents are invalid | All claims of patents, which cover guide RNAs, found to be anticipated by prior art.