How to Find Out If Something is Patented in Australia

If you want to know if something is patented in Australia, you have a few options. The State Library has print copies of all Australian patents from 1904 to 1999, and can help you find the patent number and year. If you don’t know the patent number or year, you can check AusPat or patent indexes or request a print copy. If the patent is in Australia, you can also contact the relevant patent office and request the print copy.


Whether a cDNA test will uncover whether something is patented in Australia remains unclear. The Patent Office maintains that cDNA inventions cannot be patented in Australia. However, this practice is inconsistent with patentable precedents. The Cargill and Arrowhead decisions, which set precedents for the patentability of cDNA, both establish that synthesised cDNA is not a patentable invention.

If you are wondering whether a cDNA test will reveal whether something is patented in Australia, you might want to consider the patentability of isolated nucleic acids. This process involves the isolation of nucleic acids from their natural counterparts. While they may be patented in Australia, they are not in the US or the UK. This makes it difficult for them to claim a product, or a process, that is entirely new and unpatentable.

The D’Arcy decision is an important landmark in Australian patent law. It provides guidance on the patentability of human genes and addressed the question of patent eligibility for emerging fields of technology. Moreover, it reiterates that the inquiry does not have to be governed by an exact verbal formula, but reflects the true nature of a’manufacture’, ‘invention’, or ‘patent’.

The use of cDNA tests for patentability searches is essential for the research community. Patents have been granted for a wide range of genetic material and there is little evidence that they are unpatentable. The Australian patent system, however, does not protect natural microorganisms. However, there have been a few exceptions to the rule, and cDNA tests can be very useful in identifying whether or not something is patented.

The debate over gene patents led to a court case in which Myriad Genetics Inc. and cancer voices Australia argued against the patentability of gene products. The case, commonly known as the “Myriad case” (Cancer Voices Australia v. Myriad Genetics Inc. (2013) FCA 65), involved the patentability of a gene associated with human breast cancer.

While the Australian patenting system is not easy to mimic in the U.S., it does have a number of important features that make it unique. A more nuanced view of judicial exceptions to patentability and a backup system built around structural features of relevant industries and public welfare. Those features make it possible to shield the provisional nature of genetic diagnostic testing from patent infringement and protect the public’s health.


How to find out if a cellular RNA (cRNA) is patented in Australia depends on whether the molecule is isolated from its natural counterpart and whether its synthesis or isolation is based on the natural form. However, unless the isolated cRNA contains an additional feature or function, it is unlikely to qualify as patentable subject matter. Nonetheless, Australian patent law still allows companies to patent cRNAs for medical applications.

You can search patent records in the National Archives of Australia by searching the AusPat database. In this database, you can search by name or patent number and select a range of years. Once you find the patent you’re looking for, click on the item title and select ‘Request copy’ to download a PDF of the specification. If it has not been digitised, you’ll need to check out the National Archives of Australia, as they hold copies of the original patents.

In Australia, patents for genetic material have been granted regularly, although some researchers and scientists believe this practice is unnecessary. This country has a long history of liberal patenting policies, and the Australian Patent Office and courts have acknowledged that excluding certain inventions is a good thing. However, advances in the life sciences have attracted patents. However, this trend has been questioned by some special interest groups and parliamentary reviews. There is even one high-profile court case that continues to be litigated today.

How to find out if a molecule of cRNA is patented in Australia? The Australian Patent Office (APTO) has a database called AusPat. This database is useful for researchers to search for patents. The AusPat database is a good resource for determining whether a molecule is patented in Australia. The AusPat database allows structured searches. In addition to searching by the serial number, you can also search by keyword in the “Full Specification” field. For example, searching “jespersen AND fires” will return the full text of Jespersen’s 1904 accepted Australian patent specification.

Alternatively, you can search for patents from 1935 to 1999 by application number. You can search for a cRNA patent by applying for the corresponding application number. The National Archives of Australia holds microfiche copies of the patents. The National Archives of Australia’s catalogue contains indexes for patents and a searchable database for cRNA. You may need to order the microfiche copies from the library.

If you are a biotechnology company or research institute, you should search for patents on cRNA. Patents are a legal document allowing a skilled person to make and use an invention. In some cases, a patented product is more likely to be patented. If this is the case, you should conduct a patent infringement search on your cRNA before making further investments.

cDNA isolation

If you’re wondering whether something you invented is already patented, read on. There are some rules for how to determine if something is patented in Australia. The Australian Patent Office allows the patenting of genetic material, but only if it’s isolated. There are many exceptions, however, so be sure to read the details before filing. This article explains a few of them.

First of all, you should check if you have a patent on cDNA isolation. Currently, the Federal Court of Australia has ruled that isolated nucleic acid is a patentable subject matter. This is because the nucleic acid is extracted and purified from its natural environment, unlike naturally occurring molecules. Therefore, the process of cDNA isolation is different from making a DNA or RNA product.

In June 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that cDNA is not patent-eligible. This ruling emphasized that cDNA was not a naturally occurring DNA segment, as it contained the same information when it was isolated from its surrounding genetic material. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court held that separating the gene from its surrounding genetic material is not an act of invention.

However, despite the fact that the nucleic acid used in cDNA isolation is patentable, it is not likely to be a fully-fledged invention. In fact, it is unlikely to meet the patentability requirements without a functional or additional feature. In addition, the courts of Australia and the US have differed on the requirements for a patent.

The Australian patent office’s ruling on cDNA is even stronger than the US. It holds that the patentability of cDNA isolates is not patentable, which is inconsistent with its precedents. In the Myriad decision, an Australian biotechnology specialist patent attorney argued that the cDNA exclusion does not apply to isolated cDNA for genetic diagnostic testing or other similar applications. Furthermore, the court noted that cDNA isolated for protein expression carries different information from the cDNA in the cell, and the information contained in the exons of the exons are removed.

Another key issue for biotech innovators is the patentability of genes. Australia has a history of generous patenting policies, and the Australian Patent Office and courts have recognized the advantages of excluding some inventions. It has also regularly granted patents to breakthroughs in life science research. However, this policy has sparked debates and parliamentary reviews. Interestingly, a high-profile court case is still brewing today.