Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Discussion Board Presentation

    Uploaded by

    mateo
    6 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a genetically modified mouse, known as the "Oncomouse", could not be patented under Canadian patent law. The court found that while the Oncomouse qualified as a "composition of matter", higher life forms do not fall under the definition of "invention" in the Patent Act. As a result, the patent claim on the Oncomouse was refused.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Discussion board presentation

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a genetically modified mouse, known as the "Oncomouse", could not be patented under Canadian patent law. The court found that while the Oncomouse qualified as a "composition of matter", higher life forms do not fall under the definition of "invention" in the Patent Act. As a result, the patent claim on the Oncomouse was refused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views2 pages

    Discussion Board Presentation

    Uploaded by

    mateo
    The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a genetically modified mouse, known as the "Oncomouse", could not be patented under Canadian patent law. The court found that while the Oncomouse qualified as a "composition of matter", higher life forms do not fall under the definition of "invention" in the Patent Act. As a result, the patent claim on the Oncomouse was refused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    Harvard college v.

    Canada (Commissioner of Patents),


    2002 SCC 76 (CanLII), [2002] 4 SCR 45

    Group #5

    Mateo D’luyz
    Wongyeong Jo
    Fatima Mohamed
    Analysis of the case

    ● Material facts : “ Oncomouse” pursuing a patent as a higher life form

    ● Issues with law : unpatentable due to Patent act, RSC 1985, c P-4 ( composition of matter )

    ● Rules : it is all under the Patent Act and it is a Patentable subject matter

    ● Arguments : inconsistency with the patent act - it was argued that it wasn’t consistent with the

    regulatory framework and shouldn’t all be put under the umbrella of the Patent Act

    ● Conclusion : Patent claim refused

    You might also like