Today the European Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled that human embryonic stem cell patents could be allowed if organisms can’t develop into human being. The decision overturns a 2011 European Union ruling that outlawed patents on hESC research, affirming that pluripotent human stem cells derived from parthenogenetically activated oocytes can be patented in Europe.
Parthenogenesis refers to the initiation of embryogenesis without fertilization by oocyte activation in the absence of sperm though a variety of chemical and electrical techniques. The activated oocyte contains a single or double set of maternally derived chromosomes but does not contain paternal DNA.
While patents on hESC have been upheld in the United States, the European Patent Office (EPO) has refused to grant many of the same patents on ethical grounds if the commercial exploitation of those patents goes against public order or morality. Combined with a principle of noncommercialization of the human embryo, human body, and its products led Europe to deny the patentability of hESC.
Today’s judgment was precipitated though an appeal brought by International Stem Cell Corporation (ISC), a California-based biotechnology company developing novel stem cell based therapies and biomedical products seeking European patent protection. The company had initially applied to the U.K. Intellectual Property Office for two national patents covering production of stem cell lines and corneal tissue from parthenogenetically activated oocytes.
Related on the SLP
The Office rejected both applications on the grounds that the inventions in question entail use and/or the destruction of human embryos. They are therefore not patentable under the Court of Justice’s Brüstle v. Greenpeace ruling, in which the Court stated that any nonfertilized human ovum whose development has been stimulated by parthenogenesis and which is capable of commencing the process of development of a human being constitutes a “human embryo”.
Scientists have argued that the 2011 decision was based on a misinterpretation of scientific fact and should not extend to parthenotes, which the judgment said required the same protections of personhood, and lumped parthenotes made with and without nuclear transfer together. This classification was made on the grounds that these eggs are “capable of commencing the process of development of a human being just as an embryo created by fertilization of an ovum can.”
Read full, original article: European Court Opens Door for Stem Cell Patenting
