Patent 6,924,413 was granted for rabbits whose eyes are intentionally damaged to serve as a model for "dry eye" conditions in humans

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said this week it is re-opening an investigation into whether animals, whose eyes have been purposefully damaged, can be patented.

At issue is patent 6,924,413, "Experimental animals for evaluation of therapeutic effects on corneal epithelial damages," issued to Japanese-owned Biochemical and Pharmacological Laboratories, Inc. The patent was granted for rabbits whose eyes are intentionally damaged to serve as a model for "dry eye" conditions in humans.

The patent is being challenged by the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), which argues that animal patents provide an incentive to harm animals for economic gain.

The USPTO said the challenge raised "substantial new questions of patentability" regarding animals. The agency has issued over 660 animal patents since 1987, about one-third are issued to foreign companies.

"We are relieved that the Patent Office is taking into consideration scientific information that was not considered in the original patent application," said Tracie Letterman, an attorney and Executive Director of AAVS "Animal patents have no place in our society and are an inappropriate application of U.S. patent law. A rabbit with damaged eyes is still a rabbit."

The group's first challenge to an animal patent succeeded in having the University of Texas drop its patent claims on beagles, who were severely sickened as a result of being infected with mold. In addition, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 2002 that animals couldn't be patented.

Results from a 2004 Opinion Research Corp. survey of 1,008 U.S. adults commissioned by AAVS found that two out of three people consider it unethical to issue patents on animals as if they were human inventions. Further, 85 percent of those surveyed were not even aware that governments and corporations are getting patents on animals.