The Chronicle of Higher Education
News Blog
In the Comments

"What’s the big deal? I always require 200 M&Ms with the blue ones picked out and 7 bottles of Evian with the caps loosened. Seems like pretty much the same thing."
— PLW

Professor Who Flew to Deliver Guest Lecture Bills Stanford for Carbon Offset of Travel

Recent Posts

McCain and Obama Will Debate on 3 University Campuses

New Universities in India to Offer More Academic Freedom and Less Red Tape

Disabled Students Remain Eligible for Federally Subsidized Housing

Leaked Contract Helps Sallie Mae and USA Funds in Court

Professor Who Flew to Deliver Guest Lecture Bills Stanford for Carbon Offset of Travel


Most Commented This Month

New Mexico State U. Threatens to Revoke Fired Professors' Degrees | 69

Drinking-Age Campaign Binges on Big Names, Big Media | 62

All U. of Iowa Professors Told to Undergo Training to Avoid Sexual Harassment | 50

Withhold 'Judgement' on Students When a Word is 'Misspelt' | 50

U. of San Diego Backtracks on Appointing Feminist Catholic Theologian | 49

By Category

Athletics
Community Colleges
Government & Politics
Information Technology
International
Money & Management
Northern Illinois
Research & Books
Short Subjects
Students
The Faculty

Blog Archives

Search

Keep Up to Date

Daily news blog: RSS  / Atom

Daily news reported by The Chronicle: RSS

Contact us

March 11, 2008

2 More Embryonic-Stem-Cell Patents at U. of Wisconsin Are Upheld

Two embryonic-stem-cell patents controlled by the patenting arm of the University of Wisconsin at Madison — and challenged by two public-interest groups — have been upheld by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

The news comes just two weeks after the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the university’s patenting organization, announced that the first of its three key stem-cell patents had been upheld.

The foundation, known as WARF, praised the latest decision in a statement.

The foundation also made a point of noting that its policies now allow all academic scientists to freely conduct work covered by the patents. WARF had initially pressed for tighter licensing rules for the cells and work conducted under techniques outlined by the patents, an approach that drew criticism from many in academe, as well as from the two public-interest groups that went on to challenge the patents.

Those groups, the Public Patent Foundation, of New York, and the Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights, in California, have said they would continue to challenge the three patents either in the courts or through the appeal process of the patent office. —Goldie Blumenstyk

Posted on Tuesday March 11, 2008 | Permalink |