Patents – Pandemic Timeline https://pandemictimeline.com Chronological Sequence of Events Wed, 08 Jan 2025 06:53:35 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.2 https://pandemictimeline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Covid-150x150.ico Patents – Pandemic Timeline https://pandemictimeline.com 32 32 United States Supreme Court decides DIAMOND vs. CHAKRABARTY https://pandemictimeline.com/1980/06/united-states-supreme-court-decides-diamond-vs-chakrabarty/ Mon, 16 Jun 1980 00:00:53 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=18 This Supreme Court decision allows for the patenting of living organisms, which had been forbidden prior to this decision. From the filing: In 1972, respondent [Ananda M.] Chakrabarty, a microbiologist, filed a patent application, assigned to the General Electric Co.  The application asserted 36 claims related to Chakrabarty’s invention of “a bacterium from the genus…

Read more →

]]>

This Supreme Court decision allows for the patenting of living organisms, which had been forbidden prior to this decision.

From the filing:

In 1972, respondent [Ananda M.] Chakrabarty, a microbiologist, filed a patent application, assigned to the General Electric Co.  The application asserted 36 claims related to Chakrabarty’s invention of “a bacterium from the genus Pseudomonas containing therein at least two stable energy-generating plasmids, each of said plasmids providing a separate hydrocarbon degradative pathway.”  This human-made, genetically engineered bacterium is capable of breaking down multiple components of crude oil.  Because of this property, which is possessed by no naturally occurring bacteria, Chakrabarty’s invention is believed to have significant value for the treatment of oil spills.

The mRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” have been found to alter DNA.  mRNA “vaccines” are now being used in livestock.  As the alteration of the DNA of livestock is changed by mRNA “vaccines,” DIAMOND vs. CHAKRABARTY opens the door for the “creators” of the modified livestock to claim ownership of their DNA, just as the medical industry does now with humans.  I have personally seen a document claiming ownership of the DNA of a person who had undergone a trial of a gene therapy medication, so I know this to be a fact and not mere conspiracy.  Original FDA documentation of the mRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” classified them as gene therapies.  SEC filings of the companies that manufacture the “vaccines” characterized their mRNA products as gene therapies, including the “vaccines.”  As the “creators” of the DNA claim ownership of the DNA of livestock, this could become a mechanism for the control of the food supply.  This is not a trivial matter.

Source:

See also, on this site:

]]> Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing files patent 4501923A: Process for preparing adrenochrome https://pandemictimeline.com/1982/09/minnesota-mining-and-manufacturing-files-patent-4501923a-process-for-preparing-adrenochrome/ Mon, 13 Sep 1982 00:00:50 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=17583 A process is described for preparing adrenochrome comprising oxidizing adrenaline or a salt thereof with a persulfate in an aqueous medium at a pH in the range 4 to 8 in the presence of one or more water-soluble salts of bismuth. — Process for preparing adrenochrome Source:

Read more →

]]>

A process is described for preparing adrenochrome comprising oxidizing adrenaline or a salt thereof with a persulfate in an aqueous medium at a pH in the range 4 to 8 in the presence of one or more water-soluble salts of bismuth.

— Process for preparing adrenochrome

Source:

]]> Salk Institute and University of Utah file patent US5969096: Conotoxin peptides https://pandemictimeline.com/1998/06/salk-institute-and-university-of-utah-file-patent-5969096-conotoxin-peptides/ Fri, 26 Jun 1998 00:00:05 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=11507 A paralytic peptide, ψ-conotoxin Piiie has been purified and characterized from Conus purpurascens venom. Electrophysiological studies indicate that the peptide inhibits the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR). However, the peptide does not block the binding of α-bungarotoxin, a competitive nAChR antagonist. Thus, ψ-conotoxin Piiie appears to inhibit the receptor at a site other than the acetylcholine-binding site. As ascertained by…

Read more →

]]>

Conus purpurascens

A paralytic peptide, ψ-conotoxin Piiie has been purified and characterized from Conus purpurascens venom. Electrophysiological studies indicate that the peptide inhibits the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR). However, the peptide does not block the binding of α-bungarotoxin, a competitive nAChR antagonist. Thus, ψ-conotoxin Piiie appears to inhibit the receptor at a site other than the acetylcholine-binding site. As ascertained by sequence analysis, mass spectrometry, and chemical synthesis, the peptide has the following covalent structure:  HOOCCLYGKCRRYOGCSSASCCQR* (O = 4-trans hydroxyproline; * indicates an amidated C-terminus). The disulfide connectivity of the toxin is unrelated to the α- or the αA-conotoxins, the Conus peptide families that are competitive inhibitors of the nAChR, but shows homology to the μ-conotoxins (which are Na+ channel blockers).

— Biochemistry article

Why is it important that the ψ-conotoxin not block the binding of the α-bungarotoxin?

Substantially pure conotoxin peptides are provided which inhibit synaptic transmissions at the neuromuscular junctions and which are useful both in vivo and in assays because they specifically target particular skeletal nAChRs to the exclusion of neuronal nAChRs. The peptides are of such length that they can be made by chemical synthesis, and the preferred peptides have formula: H-His-4Hyp-4Hyp-Cys-Cys-Leu-Tyr-Gly-Lys-Cys-Arg-Arg-Tyr-4Hyp-Gly-Cys-Ser-S er-Ala-Ser-Cys-Cys-Gln-Xaa.sub.24 -NH.sub.2 wherein Xaa.sub.24 is Arg or Gly.

⋮

This invention was made with Government support under Grant Nos. GM-48677, GM-22737 and AM-26741, awarded by the National Institutes of Health.  The Government has certain rights in this invention.

— United States Patent 5.969.096: Conotoxin peptides

Sources:

  • Patent
    October 19, 1999. Ki-Joon Shon, William R. Gray, John Dykert, Doju Yoshikami, Maren Watkins, David R. Hillyard, Jean E. F. Rivier, and Baldomero M. Olivera. Conotoxin peptides. 5969096, filed June 26, 1998, and issued October 19, 1999.
    https://patents.google.com/patent/US5969096,
    https://patents.justia.com/patent/5969096.
    Patent.
    Local copy.
  • Research Journal
    August 1, 1997. Ki-Joon Shon, Michelle Grilley, Richard Jacobsen, G. Edward Cartier, Chris Hopkins, William R. Gray, Maren Watkins, David R. Hillyard, Jean Rivier, Josep Torres, Doju Yoshikami, and Baldomero M. Olivera. “A Noncompetitive Peptide Inhibitor of the Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptor from Conus Purpurascens Venom.” Biochemistry 36 (31): 9581–87.
    https://doi.org/10.1021/bi970235w.
    Research Journal.

Related:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

 

]]> Pfizer files patent US6372224: Canine coronavirus S gene and uses therefor https://pandemictimeline.com/2000/01/pfizer-files-patent-6372224-canine-coronavirus-s-gene-and-uses-therefor/ Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:00:58 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1417 From the patent: The present invention provides the amino acid and nucleotide sequences of a CCV spike gene, and compositions containing one or more fragments of the spike gene and encoded polypeptide for prophylaxis, diagnostic purposes and treatment of CCV infections. — Patent US6372224B1 This is the patent for the spike protein virus, a vaccine…

Read more →

]]>

From the patent:

The present invention provides the amino acid and nucleotide sequences of a CCV spike gene, and compositions containing one or more fragments of the spike gene and encoded polypeptide for prophylaxis, diagnostic purposes and treatment of CCV infections.

— Patent US6372224B1

This is the patent for the spike protein virus, a vaccine for the canine Coronavirus, which is actually one of the multiple forms of Coronavirus.

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

But as you know, up until 1999, the topic of Coronavirus vs V [VSV?] the patenting activity around Coronavirus was uniquely applied to veterinary sciences. The first vaccine ever patented for Coronavirus was actually sought by Pfizer. The application for the first vaccine for Coronavirus, which was specifically this s spike protein. So the exact same thing that allegedly we have rushed into invention. The first application was filed January 28 2000, 21 years ago. So the idea that we we mysteriously stumbled on the the way to intervene on vaccines is not only ludicrous, it is incredulous because Timothy Millor, Sharon Klepfer, Albert Paul Reed, and Elaine Jones on January 28 2000, filed what ultimately was issued as US Patent 6372224 which was the spike protein virus, a vaccine for the canine Coronavirus, which is actually one of the multiple forms of Coronavirus. But as I said, the early work up until 1999 was largely focused in the area of vaccines for animals, the two animals receiving the most attention were probably Ralph Barics work on rabbits and the rabbit cardiomyopathy that was associated with significant problems among rabbit breeders, and then canine Coronavirus in Pfizer’s work to identify how to develop s and spike protein vaccine target candidates giving rise to the obvious evidence that says that neither the Coronavirus concept of a vaccine, nor the principle of the Coronavirus itself as a pathogen of interest with respect to the spike proteins behaviour is anything novel at all. As a matter of fact, it’s 22 years old, based on patent filings. What’s more problematic, and what is actually the most egregious problem is that Anthony Fauci and NIAID found the malleability of Coronavirus to be a potential candidate for HIV vaccines. And so SARS is actually not a natural progression of a zoonetic modification of Coronavirus.

— Dr. David Martin at 02:53

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

 

 

 

]]> Hendricus Loos files patent US6506148: Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitors https://pandemictimeline.com/2001/06/hendricus-loos-files-patent-us6506148-nervous-system-manipulation-by-electromagnetic-fields-from-monitors/ Fri, 01 Jun 2001 00:01:01 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=14760 Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near ½ Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient…

Read more →

]]>

Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near ½ Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be imbedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed effectively by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with subliminal intensity.

— Patent US6506148B2

Why does that patent number matter? Oh just the fact it’s the patent that confirms humanity is being manipulated via the nervous system through television and computers!

— Debt to Success System

Psychotronics is the intersection between consciousness, energy fields and matter. In a bill introduced to the U.S. House of Representative in 2001, Dennis J. Kucinich describes psychotronic devices as “weapons” that can be used against individuals or specific populations to exert power over behavior and mood – essentially a form of mind control.

— Pooper Mcglobber

Why Does A Patent for Nervous System Manipulation By Electromagnetic Fields from Monitors Exist?

— Clay Clark video description

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

]]> UNC Chapel Hill files patent US7279327: Methods for producing recombinant coronavirus https://pandemictimeline.com/2002/04/unc-chapel-hill-files-patent-7279327-methods-for-producing-recombinant-coronavirus/ Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:25 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1910 A helper cell for producing an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus (or more generally nidovirus) particle cell comprises (a) a nidovirus permissive cell; (b) a nidovirus replicon RNA comprising the nidovirus packaging signal and a heterologous RNA sequence, wherein the replicon RNA further lacks a sequence encoding at least one nidovirus structural protein; and (c) at…

Read more →

]]>

A helper cell for producing an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus (or more generally nidovirus) particle cell comprises (a) a nidovirus permissive cell; (b) a nidovirus replicon RNA comprising the nidovirus packaging signal and a heterologous RNA sequence, wherein the replicon RNA further lacks a sequence encoding at least one nidovirus structural protein; and (c) at least one separate helper RNA encoding the at least one structural protein absent from the replicon RNA, the helper RNA(s) lacking the nidovirus packaging signal. The combined expression of the replicon RNA and the helper RNA in the nidovirus permissive cell produces an assembled nidovirus particle which comprises the heterologous RNA sequence, is able to infect a cell, and is unable to complete viral replication in the absence of the helper RNA due to the absence of the structural protein coding sequence in the packaged replicon. Compositions for use in making such helper cells, along with viral particles produced from such cells, compositions of such viral particles, and methods of making and using such viral particles, are also disclosed.

— Patent US7279327B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

… in 1999 Anthony Fauci funded research at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, specifically to create, and you cannot help but, you know, lament what I’m about to read because this comes directly from a patent application filed on April 19 2002. And you heard the date correctly 2002 where the NIAID built an infectious replication defective Coronavirus that was specifically targeted for human lung epithelium. In other words, we made SARS and we patented it on April 19 2002, before there was ever any alleged outbreak in Asia, which as you know, followed that by several months. That patent issued is US Patent 7279327. That patent clearly lays out in very specific gene sequencing, the fact that we knew that the ACE receptor, the ACE2 binding domain, the s1 spike protein, and other elements of what we have come to know as this scourge pathogen was not only engineered, but could be synthetically modified in the laboratory, using nothing more than gene sequencing technologies, taking computer code and turning it into a pathogen or an intermediate of the pathogen. And that technology was funded exclusively in the early days as a means by which we could actually harness Coronavirus as a vector to distribute HIV vaccine.

— Dr. David Martin at 02:53

To see how DNA is generated directly from a computer, see “How We Make DNA” – Cambrian Genomics.

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

 

]]> CDC files patent US7220852: Coronavirus isolated from humans https://pandemictimeline.com/2004/04/cdc-files-patent-7220852-coronavirus-isolated-from-humans/ Mon, 12 Apr 2004 00:00:24 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1420 Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections…

Read more →

]]>

Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.

— Patent US7220852B1

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Coronavirus as a circulating pathogen inside of the viral model that we have is actually not new to the human condition and is not new to the last two decades. It’s actually been part of the sequence of proteins that circulates for quite a long time. But the alleged outbreak that took place in China in 2002, going into 2003 gave rise to a very problematic April 2003 filing by the United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. And this topic is of critical importance to get the nuance very precise, because in addition to filing the entire gene sequence on what became SARS Coronavirus, which is actually a violation of 35 US Code Section 101. You cannot patent a naturally occurring substance. The 35 US Code Section 101 violation was patent number 7220852.

— Dr. David Martin at 15:32

According to Dr. David Martin, this is the patent that records the entire gene sequence for the SARS Coronavirus.  All other Coronavirus related patents contain a segment of this sequence.  According to Dr. Martin, the sequence found for SARS CoV 2 is a segment of the original SARS Coronavirus.  This is documented in his report.

Source:

See also, on this site:

Related:

 

 

 

]]> Sequoia Pharmaceuticals files patent US7151163: Antiviral agents for the treatment, control and prevention of infections by coronaviruses https://pandemictimeline.com/2004/04/sequoia-pharmaceuticals-files-patent-7151163-antiviral-agents-for-the-treatment-control-and-prevention-of-infections-by-coronaviruses/ Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:00:20 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1422 The invention provides compositions and methods that are useful for preventing and treating a coronavirus infection in a subject. More specifically, the invention provides peptides and conjugates and pharmaceutical compositions containing those peptides and conjugates that block fusion of a coronavirus, such as the SARS virus, to a target cell. This blocking mechanism prevents or…

Read more →

]]>

The invention provides compositions and methods that are useful for preventing and treating a coronavirus infection in a subject. More specifically, the invention provides peptides and conjugates and pharmaceutical compositions containing those peptides and conjugates that block fusion of a coronavirus, such as the SARS virus, to a target cell. This blocking mechanism prevents or treats a coronavirus infection, such as a SARS infection, in a subject, such as a human subject.

— Patent US7151163B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  25:57

The patent in question, the April 28th 2003 patent 7151163, issued to Sequoia Pharmaceuticals has another problem. The problem is it was issued and published before the CDC patent on Coronavirus was actually allowed. So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not been published, because CDC had paid to keep it secret. This, my friends is the definition of criminal conspiracy racketeering and collusion. This is not a theory. This is evidence. You cannot have information in the future in form [for] a treatment for a thing that did not exist.

Reiner Fuellmich  27:16

This could well blow up into a Rico case, ultimately.

Dr David Martin  27:20

This is, it is a Rico case. It’s not could blow up into it, it is a Rico case. And the Rico pattern, which was established in April of 2003 for the first Coronavirus, was played out to exactly the same schedule when we see SARS CoV 2 show up when we have Moderna getting the spike protein sequence by phone from the vaccine research centre at NIAID prior to the definition of the novel subclade. How do you treat a thing before you actually have the thing?

— Reiner Fuellmich Interviews Dr David Martin

Sources:

Related:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

]]> The CDC files patent US7776521: Coronavirus isolated from humans https://pandemictimeline.com/2007/05/the-cdc-files-patent-7776521-coronavirus-isolated-from-humans/ Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:30 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1921 Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections…

Read more →

]]>

Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.

— Patent US7776521B1

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  15:32

The 35 US Code Section 101 violation was patent number 7220852. Now, that patent also had a series of derivative patents associated with it, these are our patent applications that were broken apart because they were of multiple patentable subject matter. But these include US Patent 46592703p, which is actually a very interesting designation, US Patent 7776521. These patents not only covered the gene sequence of SARS Coronavirus, but also covered the means of detecting it using RT-PCR. Now, the reason why that’s a problem is if you actually both own the patent on the gene itself, and you own the patent on its detection, you have a cutting advantage to being able to control 100 percent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection, meaning you have entire scientific and message control. And this patent sought by the CDC was allegedly justified by their public relations team as being sought so that everyone would be free to be able to research Coronavirus. The only problem with that statement is it’s a lie and the reason why it’s a lie is because the patent office not once but twice rejected the patent on the gene sequence as unpatentable because the gene sequence was already in the public domain. In other words, prior to CDCs filing for a patent, the patent office found 99.9 percent identity with the already existing Coronavirus recorded in the public domain, and over the rejection of the patent examiner. And after having to pay an appeal fine in 2006 and 2007, the CDC overrode the patent office’s rejection of their patent and ultimately in 2007 got the patent on SARS Coronavirus. Now, every public statement that CDC has made that said that this was in the public interest is falsifiable by their own paid bribe to the patent office. This is not something that’s subtle, and to make matters worse they paid an additional fee to keep their application private. Last time I checked, if you’re trying to make information available for the public research, you would not pay a fee to keep the information private. I wish I could have made up anything I just said, but all of that is available in the public patent archive record which any member of the public can review. And the Public PAIR, as it’s called at the United States Patent Office, has not only the evidence but the actual documents which I have in my possession. Now, this is critically important. It’s critically important because fact checkers have repeatedly stated that the novel Coronavirus, designated as SARS CoV 2 is in fact distinct from the CDC patent. And here’s both the genetic and the patent problem. If you look at the gene sequence that is filed by CDC in 2003, again in 2005 and then again in 2006, what you find is identity in somewhere between 89 to 99 percent of the sequence overlaps that have been identified in what’s called the novel subclade of SARS CoV 2. What we know is that the core designation of SARS Coronavirus, which is actually the clade of the betacoronavirus family and the subclade that has been called SARS CoV 2 have to overlap from a taxonomic point of view. You cannot have SARS designation on a thing without it first being SARS. So the disingenuous fact checking that has been done saying that somehow or another CDC has nothing to do with this particular patent, or this particular pathogen, is beyond both the literal credibility of the published sequences. And it’s also beyond credulity when it comes to the ICTV taxonomy because it very clearly states that this is in fact a sub clade of the clade called SARS Coronavirus. Now, what’s important is on the 28th of April, and listen to the date very carefully because this date is problematic.

Sources:

Related:

See also, on this site:

 

 

]]> Ablynx files patent US9193780: Amino acid sequences directed against envelope proteins of a virus and polypeptides comprising the same for the treatment of viral diseases https://pandemictimeline.com/2009/06/ablynx-files-patent-9193780-amino-acid-sequences-directed-against-envelope-proteins-of-a-virus-and-polypeptides-comprising-the-same-for-the-treatment-of-viral-diseases/ Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:35 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1424 The present invention relates in part to amino acid sequences that are directed against and/or that can specifically bind to an envelope protein of a virus, as well as to compounds or constructs, and in particular proteins and polypeptides, that comprise or essentially consist of one or more such amino acid sequences. — Patent US9193780B2…

Read more →

]]>

The present invention relates in part to amino acid sequences that are directed against and/or that can specifically bind to an envelope protein of a virus, as well as to compounds or constructs, and in particular proteins and polypeptides, that comprise or essentially consist of one or more such amino acid sequences.

— Patent US9193780B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  33:24

Oh it does. The 5th of June 2008, which is an important date because it is actually around the time when DARPA the Defence Advanced Research Programme in the United States actively took an interest in Coronavirus as a biological weapon. June 5 2008 Ablynx, which as you know is now part of Sanofi, filed a series of patents that specifically targeted what we’ve been told is the novel feature of the SARS CoV 2 virus. And you heard what I just said, this is the 5th of June 2008.

Reiner Fuellmich  34:09

They found what?

Dr David Martin  34:10

Specifically they targeted what was called the poly basic cleavage site for SARS Cov, the novel spike protein and the ACE2 receptor binding domain which is allegedly novel to SARS CoV 2, and all of that was patented on the 5th of June 2008. And those patents in sequence were issued between November 24th of 2015, which was US Patent 9193780. So that one came out after the gain of function moratorium.

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

]]>