Bibliography for LX5643 - Patent Law and Practice BETA

Adelman, Martin J. Global Issues in Patent Law. St. Paul, MN: West, 2011. Print.

Aplin, Tanya Frances, and Jennifer Davis. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. ‘Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials’. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. 603–721. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b82d2c83-8c2b-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

---. ‘Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials’. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. 603–721. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b82d2c83-8c2b-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

---. ‘Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials’. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. 603–721. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b82d2c83-8c2b-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

---. ‘Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials’. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. 603–721. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b82d2c83-8c2b-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. Print.

---. ‘Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials’. Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Third edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2017. 603–721. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=b82d2c83-8c2b-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

Arthur, Charles Arthur. ‘Should Apple Finally Call Time on Smartphone Patent Wars?’ Guardian (2014): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/05/apple-iphone-android-wars-legal-patent-battles>.

Bainbridge, David I. Intellectual Property. Tenth edition. Harlow, England: Pearson, 2018. Print.

‘BBC Radio 4 - In Business, Gene Patenting’. N.p., 8 Aug. 2013. Web. <https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b037vb4d>.

Bently, Lionel et al. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

---. Intellectual Property Law. Fifth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

Bonadio, E. ‘Biotech Patents and Morality after Brussels’. European Intellectual Property Review 2012. Web. <http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/4097/1/Biotech%20patents%20and%20morality%20after%20Brussels.pdf>.

Bowcott, Owen. ‘Unified Patent Court Split between Paris, London and Munich’. Guardian (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jul/03/unified-patent-court-london>.

Brennan, David J. ‘Biogen Sufficiency Reconsidered’. Intellectual Property Quarterly (2009): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I42B534B0CE7911DE91DCE6753676A05A&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

‘British and Irish Legal Information Institute’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.bailii.org/>.

Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. European Patents Sourcefinder. Sweet & Maxwell. Print.

Christie, Andrew, and Stephen Gare, eds. Blackstone’s Statutes on Intellectual Property. 14th edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2018. Print.

Cockbain, Julian, and Sigrid Sterckx. ‘Is the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office Authorised to Extend the Bounds of the Patentable? The G5/83 Second Medical Indication/EISAI and G2/08 Dosage Regime/ABBOTT RESPIRATORY Cases’. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 42.3 (2011): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=IE5E58D00B69A11E08901C93154A11BF4&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Commission on Intellectual Property Rights. ‘Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy’. N.p., 2002. Web. <http://www.cipr.org.uk/graphic/documents/final_report.htm>.

Cornish, W. R. Intellectual Property: Omnipresent, Distracting, Irrelevant? Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.

Cornish, W. R., David Llewelyn, and Tanya Frances Aplin. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. ‘Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights’. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. 1–51. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=c56f2b34-9a28-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

---. Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights. Eighth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, Thomson Reuters, 2013. Print.

‘Court of Justice of the European Union’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_6999>.

Cullet, Philippe. ‘Patents and Medicines: The Relationship between TRIPS and the Human Right to Health’. International Affairs. Web. <http://www.ielrc.org/content/a0301.pdf>.

‘Difference Engine: The PC All over Again?’ The Economist (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://www.economist.com/babbage/2012/09/09/difference-engine-the-pc-all-over-again>.

Dinwoodie, Graeme B. ‘*The International Intellectual Property Law System: New Actors, New Institutions, New Sources’. Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review (2006): n. pag. Web. <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=749349>.

Dinwoodie, Graeme B., and Mark D. Janis. Trade Dress and Design Law. New York: Aspen Publishers, 2010. Print.

Drahos, Peter, and John Braithwaite. Information Feudalism: Who Owns the Knowledge Economy? London: Earthscan, 2003. Print.

Ealey, Doug and Chartered Institute of Patent Agents (London, England). Study Guide to the Patents Acts. 2014 ed. London: CIPA, 2014. Print.

England, P., and S. Parker. ‘Obviousness in the New European Order’. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 7.11 (2012): 805–815. Web. <https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article/7/11/805/931030>.

‘Entertainment and Media Law Reports’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_begins&amp;criteria=Entertainment%20and%20Media%20Law%20Reports&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘Entertainment Law Review’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=issn_equals&amp;criteria=0959-3799&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘EU Law - EUROPA | European Union’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en>.

‘European Copyright and Design Reports’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_equals&amp;criteria=European%20Copyright%20and%20Design%20Reports&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘European Intellectual Property Review’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_equals&amp;criteria=European%20intellectual%20property%20review&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘European Patent Office (EPO)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.epo.org/index.html>.

‘European Patent Office Reports’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=issn_equals&amp;criteria=0269-0802&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘European Patents Handbook (CIPA)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/Browse/Home/Books/CIPAEuropeanPatents?transitionType=Default&amp;contextData=(sc.Default)&amp;firstPage=true&amp;comp=pluk&amp;bhcp=1>.

‘European Trade Mark Reports’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_begins&amp;criteria=European%20Trade%20Mark%20Reports&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/>.

Evans, Gail E. ‘Intellectual Property as a Trade Issue: The Making of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights’. n. pag. Web. <https://www.kluwerlawonline.com/document.php?id=WOCO1994013&amp;PHPSESSID=fbv506fb18nbgip10pr4a9mpl0>.

Fisher, Matthew. ‘Classical Economics and Philosophy of the Patent System’. Intellectual Property Quarterly (2005): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=IBD9B2790E72111DA9D198AF4F85CA028&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

---. ‘Extracting the Price of a Patent: Enablement and Written Description’. Intellectual Property Quarterly (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/app/document?access-method=toc&amp;src=toce&amp;docguid=I9AF8DA802C4211E29A4AF883571617EC&amp;crumb-action=append&amp;context=25>.

---. Fundamentals of Patent Law: Interpretation and Scope of Protection. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2007. Web. <http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=Brunel&isbn=9781847313812>.

‘Fleet Street Patent Law Reports’. n. pag. Print.

Floyd, C. ‘Infringement by Repair and the Troublesome Definition of “Making” the Invention: A Critique of Schütz v Werit’. 2010. Web. <http://fordhamipconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Floyd_InfringementByRepair.pdf>.

Floyd, Christopher. ‘Novelty under the Patents Act 1977: The State of the Art after Merrell Dow’. European Intellectual Property Review 18.9 (1996): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I7D8B5500E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Fox, Nick. A Guide to the EPC 2000: A Practitioner’s Guide to the New Law. 4th ed. London: Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys, 2010. Print.

Franzosi, Mario. ‘Non-Obviousness’. The Journal of World Intellectual Property 6.2 (2005): 233–250. Web. <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1747-1796.2003.tb00200.x>.

Geiger, Christophe. ‘Intellectual Property Shall Be Protected!? Article 17(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: A Mysterious Provision with an Unclear Scope’. European Intellectual Property Review 31.3 (2009): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=IDE325F70E45111DD8BEBE47BB36F59BF&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Giles, J. ‘The Brustle and Eli Lilly Cases: Creation--God or Humankind?’ Oxford Journal of Law and Religion 1.2 (2012): 518–523. Web. <http://oro.open.ac.uk/56700/2/56700.pdf>.

Gillmor, Dan. ‘America’s Dysfunctional Patent System Is Stifling Innovation’. Guardian (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/30/america-dysfunctional-patent-system-innovation>.

Gosseries, Axel, Alain Marciano, and Alain Strowel. Intellectual Property and Theories of Justice. Basingstoke [England]: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Web. <http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=219811&amp;entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

‘Guidelines for Examination in the European Patent Office’. 2017. Web. <https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/guidelines.html>.

Harmon, Shawn H.E., Graeme Laurie, and Aidan Courtney. ‘Dignity, Plurality and Patentability: The Unfinished Story of Brustle v Greenpeace’. European Law Review 38.1 (2013): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I446810B274CB11E2BD04BE991BF76CB2&entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Harris, Paul. ‘Monsanto Sued Small Famers to Protect Seed Patents, Report Says’. Guardian (2013): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/12/monsanto-sues-farmers-seed-patents>.

Helfer, Laurence R., ed. Intellectual Property and Human Rights. Vol. 7. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2013. Print.

Heller, Michael A., and Rebecca S. Eisenberg. ‘Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research’. Science 280.5364 (1998): n. pag. Web. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/2895332?pq-origsite=summon&amp;seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents>.

Hilty, Reto et al. ‘The Unitary Patent Package: Twelve Reasons for Concern’. SSRN Electronic Journal (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://www.ip.mpg.de/fileadmin/ipmpg/content/stellungnahmen/mpi-ip_twelve-reasons_2012-10-17_01.pdf>.

‘HM Courts & Tribunals Service - GOV.UK’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service>.

Hobson, Andrew, and Tamar Shafran. ‘Kelly and Chiu v GE Healthcare Limited: Pharmaceutical Companies at Risk of Successful Employee Inventor Compensation Claim Following Landmark Ruling’. European Intellectual Property Review 31.10 (2009): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I1C7E77A099C911DE8BBDB40346639712&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Howell, Claire. ‘Extra Compensation for Inventive Employees: Is Our System Equitable, Unbiased and Motivating?’ Intellectual Property Quarterly (2011): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I37DBCE500DFB11E1B928A0CFA159DA04&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Hughes, J. ‘The Philosophy of Intellectual Property’. Georgetown Law Journal (1988): n. pag. Web. <https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/glj77&amp;i=309&amp;a=YnJ1bmVsLmVkdQ>.

‘IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law’. n. pag. Web. <https://link.springer.com/journal/40319>.

‘Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy: Report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights’. Web. <http://www.iprcommission.org/papers/pdfs/final_report/ciprfullfinal.pdf>.

Intellectual Property Institute. ‘Intellectual Property Quarterly’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_equals&amp;criteria=Intellectual%20property%20quarterly&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

Intellectual Property Office. ‘Examining Patent Applications for Biotechnological Inventions - GOV.UK’. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-for-biotechnological-inventions>.

---. ‘Examining Patent Applications for Medical Inventions - GOV.UK’. 2016. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-for-medical-inventions>.

---. ‘Examining Patent Applications Relating to Chemical Inventions’. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/examining-patent-applications-relating-to-chemical-inventions>.

---. ‘Patents: Manual of Patent Practice - GOV.UK’. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/patents-manual-of-patent-practice>.

Jaffe, Adam B., and Joshua Lerner. Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken Patent System Is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do about It. [New ed.]. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2007. Web. <http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=313338&amp;entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Jewess, Michael. Inside Intellectual Property: Best Practice in Intellectual Property Law, Management, and Strategy. London: The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys, 2013. Print.

Jones, Colin and Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. Patent Co-Operation Treaty Handbook. Sweet & Maxwell. Print.

‘Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Practice’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&searchType=alternate_title_equals&criteria=Journal%20of%20Intellectual%20Property%20Law%20and%20Practice&titleType=JOURNALS&filterBy=All&beginPage=0&language=en-gb>.

Keeling, David T. Intellectual Property Rights in EU Law: Vol.1: Free Movement and Competition Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.

Kitch, Edmund W. ‘The Nature and Function of the Patent System’. The Journal of Law & Economics 20.2 (1977): n. pag. Web. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/725193?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents>.

Kitchin, Lord Justice. ‘Transcript of Lord Justice Kitchin’s Speech on the Unitary Patent (2012)’. N.p., 2012. Web. <http://www.cipa.org.uk/pages/Congres-Dinner-2012-Lord-Justice-Kitchin>.

Kur, Annette, and Thomas Dreier. ‘European Intellectual Property Law: Texts, Cases and Materials’. European Intellectual Property Law: Texts, Cases and Materials. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2013. 39–83. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=fe07e640-4f29-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

Laddie, Hugh. ‘*Kirin Amgen — The End of Equivalents in England?1’. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 40.1 n. pag. Web. <https://login.ezproxy.brunel.ac.uk/login?url=https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=57VC-N3D1-DXM0-0292&amp;csi=402200&amp;oc=00240&amp;perma=true&amp;elb=t>.

Landes, William M., and Richard A. Posner. The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003. Web. <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&amp;AuthType=ip,shib&amp;db=nlebk&amp;AN=282048&amp;site=ehost-live&amp;scope=site&amp;custid=s1123049>.

---. ‘The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law’. The Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 2003. Web. <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&amp;AuthType=ip,shib&amp;db=nlebk&amp;AN=282048&amp;site=ehost-live&amp;scope=site&amp;custid=s1123049>.

Luginbühl, Stefan and Molengraaff Instituut voor Privaatrecht. Centrum voor Intellectueel Eigendomsrecht. European Patent Law: Towards a Uniform Interpretation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2011. Web. <http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=302423&amp;entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Machlup, Fritz, and Edith Penrose. ‘The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century’. The Journal of Economic History 10.1 (1950): n. pag. Web. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/2113999?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents>.

McVeigh, Karen. ‘US Supreme Court Rules Human Genes Cannot Be Patented’. Guardian (2013): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/jun/13/supreme-court-genes-patent-dna>.

Merges, R. P. ‘The Law and Economics of Employee Inventions’. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology (1999): n. pag. Web. <https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/hjlt13&amp;i=7&amp;a=YnJ1bmVsLmVkdQ>.

Merges, Robert P., and Richard R. Nelson. ‘On the Complex Economics of Patent Scope’. Columbia Law Review 90.4 (1990): n. pag. Web.

Musker, David C. Community Design Law: Principles and Practice. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2002. Print.

‘National Law Relating to the EPC’. 2015. Web. <https://www.epo.org/law-practice/legal-texts/national-law.html>.

Norman, Helen E. Intellectual Property Law. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Print.

Ohly, Ansgar, and Justine Pila, eds. The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law: Towards a European Legal Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Print.

---, eds. ‘The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law: Towards a European Legal Methodology’. The Europeanization of Intellectual Property Law: Towards a European Legal Methodology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. 199–216. Web. <https://contentstore.cla.co.uk/secure/link?id=74535763-8228-e911-80cd-005056af4099>.

‘’Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions’ (COM(2002) 92 Final — 2002/0047(COD))’. Official Journal of the European Union. Web. <https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2003:061:0154:0163:EN:PDF>.

‘Patently Absurd! - Weird & Wacky Patents’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.patentlyabsurd.org.uk/>.

Pehlivan, Ceyhun Necati. ‘The Creation of a Single European Patent System: From Dream to (Almost) Reality’. European Intellectual Property Review 34.7 (2012): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I527E01A0B9BE11E1AAED857176AF78A8&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Pila, Justine. ‘Chemical Products and Proportionate Patents Before and After’. King’s Law Journal 20.3 (2009): 489–526. Web. <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09615768.2009.11423685>.

---. ‘Dispute over the Meaning of “Invention” in Art.52(2) EPC - the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions in Europe’. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 36.2 (2005): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=IF3AE89208C7F11DDA308CE7DDE22A835&entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

---. ‘“Sewing the Fly Buttons on the Statute”: Employee Inventions and the Employment Context’. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 32.2 (2012): n. pag. Web. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/41682779?pq-origsite=summon&amp;seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents>.

---. ‘*THE EUROPEAN PATENT: AN OLD AND VEXING PROBLEM’. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 62.04 (2013): 917–940. Web. <https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-and-comparative-law-quarterly/article/european-patent-an-old-and-vexing-problem/E716460F268D7382391120CA66475DCC>.

---. The Requirement for Invention in Patent Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.

Plomer, Aurora. ‘EU Ban on Stem Cell Patents Is a Threat Both to Science and the Rule of Law | Aurora Plomer’. Guardian (2011): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2011/dec/12/eu-ban-stem-cell-patents>.

‘Prizes, Not Patents by Joseph E. Stiglitz - Project Syndicate’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/prizes--not-patents?barrier=accesspaylog>.

Pumfrey, Nicholas. ‘The Doctrine of Equivalents in Various Patent Regimes: Does Anybody Have It Right?’ n. pag. Web. <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2224188>.

‘Reports of Patent, Design and Trade Mark Cases’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_equals&amp;criteria=Reports%20of%20Patent,%20Design%20and%20Trade%20Mark%20Cases&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

Seville, Catherine. EU Intellectual Property Law and Policy. Second edition. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016. Web. <https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/brunelu/detail.action?docID=4731305>.

Sharples, Andrew. ‘Industrial Applicability, Patents and the Supreme Court: Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Co’. European Intellectual Property Review 34.4 (2012): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&docguid=I09DDC441647711E1AAB4EE4A0ACB9543&entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Sharples, Andrew, and Duncan Curley. ‘Experimental Novelty: Synthon v SmithKline Beecham’. European Intellectual Property Review 28.5 (2006): n. pag. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/document?crumb-action=reset&amp;docguid=I7D89A751E45411DA92358E85EE602D8A&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

Smedley, Tim. ‘Patent Wars: Has India Taken on Big Pharma and Won?’ Guardian (2013): n. pag. Web. <https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/patent-wars-india-takes-on-big-pharma>.

Southgate, T. ‘Can You Patent an Experience?’ The Guardian (2013): n. pag. Web. <https://web.archive.org/web/20140831204301/http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/partner-zone-brand-union/patent-brand-experience>.

Stone, David. European Union Design Law: A Practitioners’ Guide. Second edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2016. Print.

Struve, F. W. ‘Ending Unnecessary Novelty Destruction: Why Europe Should Adopt the Safety-Net Grace Period as an International Best Practice’. William Mitchell Law Review 4 (2013): n. pag. Web. <https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/wmitch39&amp;i=1424&amp;a=YnJ1bmVsLmVkdQ>.

Suthersanen, Uma. Design Law: European Union and United States of America. 2nd ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2010. Print.

Terrell, Thomas. Terrell on the Law of Patents. Ed. Colin Birss and Tim Austen. Eighteenth edition. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2016. Web. <http://login.westlaw.co.uk/maf/wluk/ext/app/tocectory?crumb-action=reset&amp;stnew=true&amp;crumb-label=Books&amp;sttype=stdtemplate&amp;ao=o.I361019C020F511E68DCBBC525B125694&amp;ndd=2&amp;entityID=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity>.

‘The 1709 Blog’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/>.

‘The Ethics of Patenting DNA - Nuffield Bioethics’. 2002. Web. <http://nuffieldbioethics.org/project/patenting-dna>.

‘The IPKat’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/>.

‘The Journal of World Intellectual Property’. n. pag. Web. <http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/ejp/?libHash=CM7LY9CU9W#/search/?searchControl=title&amp;searchType=alternate_title_equals&amp;criteria=journal%20of%20world%20intellectual%20property&amp;titleType=JOURNALS&amp;filterBy=All&amp;beginPage=0&amp;language=en-gb>.

‘The PCT Applicant’s Guide’. 2017. Web. <http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/appguide/>.

‘The UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/intellectual-property-office>.

Torremans, Paul. Holyoak and Torremans Intellectual Property Law. Eighth edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Print.

‘Unitary Patent – Ratification Progress’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://unitarypatent.com/ratification-process/>.

Visser, Derk. The Annotated European Patent Convention. Twenty-fifth revised edition. Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer, 15AD. Print.

Waelde, Charlotte et al. Contemporary Intellectual Property: Law and Policy. Fourth edition. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2016. Print.

Whitehead, B. ‘Patent Construction after Amgen: Are Patent Claims Construed More Widely or Narrowly than Previously?’ Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 1.5 (2006): 332–337. Web. <https://academic.oup.com/jiplp/article-abstract/1/5/332/800035?redirectedFrom=fulltext>.

‘World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <http://www.wipo.int/portal/en/index.html>.

‘World Trade Organization (WTO)’. N.p., n.d. Web. <https://www.wto.org/>.