Invalidity dossier
US 5149636
Method for introducing cloned, amplifiable genes into eucaryotic cells and for producing proteinaceous products
Current assignee: Columbia University
Added 9/23/2026, 9:17:51 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview: US 5,149,636
Title: Method for introducing cloned, amplifiable genes into eucaryotic cells and for producing proteinaceous products
Patent number: US 5,149,636 A
Application number: US 07/249,454
Inventor(s): Richard Axel; James M. Roberts
Assignee (per source): Columbia University in the City of New York
Priority date: 1982-03-15
Filing date: 1988-09-26
Publication (grant) date: 1992-09-22
Status: Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2009-09-22
Purpose and plain-language scope (from the supplied excerpt):
The patent concerns methods for introducing cloned genes into eucaryotic cells and for producing proteinaceous products, including a role for amplifiable genes and gene amplification. The excerpt lists prior-art/claim keywords including DNA, gene, cells, APRT, and "process according," and indicates claims addressing DNA, manufacturing processes, deficient cells, messenger RNA, human genes, insulin, and metazoa. It states the invention involves introducing a gene into a eucaryotic cell and producing a product. The record notes a family has litigation and links a first worldwide family litigation filing, but the excerpt does not describe the litigation.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5149636/en
What the excerpt does not establish:
- The full text of any claim, the abstract, or the written description (the source was fetched only in excerpt).
- The complete list of claims, their scope, or their dependency.
- The exact mechanism by which genes are introduced, amplified, or expressed.
- Whether any listed "prior art keywords" are actually the patent's claims.
- The correctness of the assignee listing, the priority date, or the legal status (the source itself labels these as assumptions).
- Any details of the referenced litigation; and it is outside this review to analyze litigation, ownership transfers, validity, or prior art.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:34:24 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5149636. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.