您的账号已在其他设备登录,您当前账号已强迫下线,
如非您本人操作,建议您在会员中心进行密码修改

确定
收藏 | 浏览36

Court Decision: 264 Federal Supplement, 2d Series 1064; 2003 May 29 (date of decision). Plaintiffs in this case were a group of parents of children afflicted with Canavan disease, who provided tissue for research on the disease and aided in identification of other affected families, and three nonprofit organizations that had developed a confidential database and Canavan disease registry. The defendants were physician-researcher Reuben Matalon, who isolated and patented the Canavan gene sequence and developed genetic screening tests for it, and the Miami facilities where he did his research. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissed several of the plaintiffs' claims, including lack of informed consent, breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent concealment of the patent, and misappropriation of trade secrets. However, the court upheld the claim of unjust enrichment made by the donors of tissue, on the grounds that "the facts paint a picture of a continuing research collaboration that involved Plaintiffs also investing time and significant resources."

来源:West's federal supplement 2003 年 264卷

知识库介绍

临床诊疗知识库该平台旨在解决临床医护人员在学习、工作中对医学信息的需求,方便快速、便捷的获取实用的医学信息,辅助临床决策参考。该库包含疾病、药品、检查、指南规范、病例文献及循证文献等多种丰富权威的临床资源。

详细介绍
热门关注
免责声明:本知识库提供的有关内容等信息仅供学习参考,不代替医生的诊断和医嘱。

收藏
| 浏览:36
来源:
West's federal supplement 2003 年 264卷
标签:
Biomedical and Behavioral Research Genetics and Reproduction Legal Approach
Court Decision: 264 Federal Supplement, 2d Series 1064; 2003 May 29 (date of decision). Plaintiffs in this case were a group of parents of children afflicted with Canavan disease, who provided tissue for research on the disease and aided in identification of other affected families, and three nonprofit organizations that had developed a confidential database and Canavan disease registry. The defendants were physician-researcher Reuben Matalon, who isolated and patented the Canavan gene sequence and developed genetic screening tests for it, and the Miami facilities where he did his research. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida dismissed several of the plaintiffs' claims, including lack of informed consent, breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent concealment of the patent, and misappropriation of trade secrets. However, the court upheld the claim of unjust enrichment made by the donors of tissue, on the grounds that "the facts paint a picture of a continuing research collaboration that involved Plaintiffs also investing time and significant resources."