North, I was always under the impression, as written re: patent law that something can be patented if it is NOT OBVIOUS.
Now this is my take on PS Targeting as it directly influences, modifies, changes, redirects many MANY protein pathways, levels...etc so if no Big Pharma or down to smaller pharma biotechs / researchers ...etc could NO WAY know what to Target or patent .etc because it had been for many years NOT OBVIOUS at all ....
UNTIL one possibly stepped on PS Targeting patents, then SEEN down to the cellular levels, expression of proteins being rerouted or modified or activated or deactivated....etc...etc, and since we could only see down to this cellar level going back at most 10 years....
So wouldn't SOME patents out there that claim to reactivate the immu e system without saying how they did it....possibly be null and void, especially IF Peregrine had a trial or collaboration with the same party and that other party exploited PS Targeting patented knowledge to find something only obvious after watching cellular protein pathways after Targeting flipped PS ??
Hopefully that makes sense.....and part II deals with Bayer and Dana Farber filing patents that include a patent of Peregrine's for targeting PS ....
What do you make of that?
This shows that other Big Pharma have been Targeting PS for them to include it in their patent and would require a license to use....from Peregrine I would assume.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
