NEW DISCOVERIES OF ALEXANDER CHERKASKY

NEW DISCOVERIES OF ALEXANDER CHERKASKY It is possible to get the litigation funding, to sue Biontech and Curevac and get the big compensation for the deliberate concealment and plagiarism of ideas, because these companies have demonstrably enriched themselves unjustly, in particular by intentionally not naming my name and my patent documents and by the systematic disadvantage of my person. Both plagiaristic users of my inventions, users named Ugur Sahin and Dietmar Hopp have anti-Semitic background, because Sahin is Iranian (whereby Iranian regime is anti-Semitic) Mustafa Prize Laureate and the father of Dietmar Hopp Emil Hopp was according to the article in Juedische Allgemeine Zeitung (The Jewish General Newspaper, Die Legende vom unschuldigen Nazi, The legend from innocent nazi, March 14, 2019) Nazi, SA troup fuehrer and he destroyed, burned the Synagoge of Hoffenheim, and his son Dietmar Hopp tried to justify his father and his crimes against Jews especially in 1935 and in 1938. The anti-Semitic background of Hopp and Curevac as well as of Sahin and Biontech can explain the support of Germany to these persons and firms and their plagiarism and deceving authorities, publicity and investors and for the systematic discrimination and slandering of my person. This can be considered as Neo-Arization from Jewish scientist, from The „Second Einstein“ as I was called in the media. My and other published patent documents in internet are patent literary visual works. Published patent documents (patent applications or patents, independently in what country and in what time they were made or independently from the fact whether these patents are valid or not) are storaged in data banks for patent literature and are patent literary works or literary works. As soon as literary works are digitalized in internet or in any computer or search system, they can be defined as visual or audiovisual works according to the definitions of Title 17.U.S. Code, §101 Definitions. These audiovisual or visual works „consist of a series of related images which are intrinsically intended to be shown by the use of … electronic equipment, together with accompanying sounds, if any regardless of the nature of the material objects, in which the works are embodied“. Thus internet, any internet ot computer search system or any computer are transformers of literary works or patent literary works into visual or ausiovisual works. This transformation creates the new legal basis for defining and consideration of patent literary works making the patent literary worls objects of protection and application of copyright and related issues. According to 17 U.S. Code §101 Definitions „Literary works“ including patent literary works, are „other than audiovisual works“ and literary works are works „expressed in words, numbers, or other verbal or numerical symbols or indicia, regardless of the nature of the material objects such as books, periodicals, manuscripts, phonorecords, film...“ but, according to 17. U.S. Code §101 Definitions, literary works, including patent lilterary works, transformed by internet, search systems computers or computer programs, are audiovisual or visual works, because these transformed works „consist of a series of related images... intended to be shown by the use of … electronic equipment“ (also without sounds). This internet or computer-mediated transformation is the computer program-induced or assisted literary-to-visual work transformation. Thus the following transformations are possible according to the definitions of the Title 17 U.S. Code §101: patent law-to-copyright-transformation or patent literary-to-literary work transformation and literary-to-visual work transformation. Thus literary works transformed by computer programs into works of visual art. According to Title 17 U.S. Code §102 - Subject matter of copyright: In general „(a) Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this titte, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, … (1) literary works, i.e. also patent literary works, and (6) motion pictures or other audiovisual works. (b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, … concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work,“ but according to Title 17 U.S. Code §106 A-Rights of certain authors to attribution and intergrity: „the author of a work of visual art – (1) shall have the right – (A) to claim authorship of that works, and (3) shall have the right – (A) to prevent any intentional distortion, multilation, or modification of that work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation, and any intentional distortion, mutilation, a modification of that work is a violation of that right.“ Thus, according to Title 17 U.S. Code §102 and 106 A, ideas could not be protected, but the author of a work of visual art, which comprise transformed literary or patent literary works, shall have the right to claim authorship of that works. As result of this, everybody who uses the ideas, that are published in my patent documents must recognize and write my authorship. This must be especially the case, if or as soon as any user or users know about my published patent literary visual works. Some words about the prohibition to protect ideas: It must be emphasized that this law, the prohibition to protect ideas and methods, is contradictive to the patent law, because patent protection covers ideas and methods. In addition, the statement in the U.S. Code that ideas could not be protected, is the discrimination of intellectual property in relation to other property, although intellectual property is the basis for creating any other property. This discrimination contradicts to human rights and is an infrigement of human rights, especially rights to property. Intellectual property allows to avoid wars and victims, for example because my invention of high-quality synthetic diamonds US20120199792 (international patent application WO2012104722, German DE102011010422 and granted patent DE20211010422 B4) allows to create like-natural synthetic diamonds as replacement to blood diamonds. This is only one example. Discriminated inventors can solve many problems of human kind. And many problems of human kind, such as diseases, are consequences of the discrimination of inventors. According to Title 17 U.S. Code §104 A – Copyright in restored works „ (4) Commencement of infringement for reliance parties … (3) Effect of material false statements, Any material false statement knowingly made with respect to any restored copyright identified in any notice of intent shall make void all claims and assertions made with respect to such restored copyright.“ Internet, computer programs and computers make copyright applicable to patent documents and transform published patent documents to patent literary works or literary works and transform patent literary works to audiovisual or visual works or works of visual art. This fact opens new claims and perspectives for reconsideration of questions relating to authorship and concealing of authorship and deceiving of investors by concealing of authorship. The legal basis exists for claiming the mentioning my authorship by users as well as for getting compensation for systematic concealing of my authorship and the legal based exists for punishing those who intentionally deceived and continue to deceive investors by concealing my authorship. That persons and firms conceal my authorship in order to get money, more money and more benefits in this unfair competition, as well as to manipulate values and thus they deceived and continue to deceive investors. For example the patent document of Ugur Sahin and others, applied by Biontech, organization Tron at the University of Mainz and titled „Particles comprising a shell with RNA (published as US20160250323, AU2013401479, CA2925047 and other documents claiming priority of the year 2013), describes „A particle comprising: (i) a vesicular core, (ii) at least one therapeutucally effective compound encapsulated within the vesicular core, and (iii) RNA forming a hydrophilic shell on at least a portion on the vesicular core.“ This is not new and not inventive because of my prior patent documents. My prior document DE19818938 describes viruses as cores comprising RNA. My US20090070900 comprises in claim 1 a4. any combination of elements, c3. lipids, c10. nucleic acids RNA and DNA. Claims 2, 10 and 11 of my US20080242565 comprise nucleic acids and oil. Claims 1 and 2 of my DE102006054892 comprise nucleic acids with oils. Fusion proteins according to Sahin's US11345731 (especially claims 1, 24,25 and 27, (claim 27 for Fc fusion proteins), as well as 31 and 36-39) are not new and not inventive because of my DE19925052, DE10160248 and DE10162870 for anticancer fusion proteins chemically modified sequences are covered by my DE102007027596 (claim 8). US9476055 and US20100129877 (Motification of RNA, Producing an Increased Transcript Stability and Translation Efficiency) as well as US20170166905 and WO2016005324 of Biontech (Stabilization of poly(a)sequence encoding DNA sequences) are not new and not inventive because of my prior DE10202191 and its claim 9 comprising nucleic acid sequences with specific recognition sites or regions either in the middle of a sequence, or on both ends of a sequence or at any other region of the sequence. Poly (a) sequences are described in my patent document DE19929530 A1 (from the year 1999, column 3). Title 18 was also violated. Code §1341 (Frauds and swindles), 18. U.S. Code Chapter 47 (Fraud and False Statements) §1001 and §1035 and against 15 U.S. Code §45 (Unfair competition unlawful). The facts or evidence of plagiarism, discrimination and unfair competition as well as fraud remain facts, whether or not patents have been granted, because the grant of a patent is not a prerequisite for an invention to be considered an invention, and regardless of whether whether actions for annulment have been filed or not, because an action for annulment is not a prerequisite for examining plagiarism or idea plagiarism as plagiarism and allowing it to be valid. It is demonstrably about the whole, about the combination of unjustified enrichment through unfair competition and systematic disadvantage through boycott and refusal to recognize my priority and from plagiarism and false information of investors and partners by Biontech and Curevac when collecting and earning money by willfully deliberately concealing my name and my priority, despite many years of knowledge about me and my worldwide priority claiming patent documents. Based on my intellectual property and unfair competition and personal disadvantage, Biontech and Curevac have unjustly enriched themselves because these companies, while raising and making money, intentionally presented false, misleading and incomplete information to the investors, the public and the authorities . Through this wrong information and through the concealment and through the unauthorized enrichment, these companies have disadvantaged me and thus economically damaged me, which is why the compensation claims arise. Added to this is the fact that the misconduct of the companies Biontech and Curevac towards me violates, among other things, my personal rights, in particular my human right to free personal development. That multiple public officials encourage the mistakes and misconduct of Biontech and Curevac only confirms the fact that public officials make mistakes too, otherwise many diseases would have been fought but people suffer and die from diseases including COVID-19, cancer and autoimmune diseases , every day. Instead of wanting to fight the disease, and it must be emphasized that both Biontech and Curevac claim to want to fight the disease, these companies and people who encourage the wrongdoing of these companies are waging war on me. This war also includes the complete ignoring of my evidence and the complete boycott of my priority, my priority-claiming patent documents, and my proposals for cooperation. These people and companies are therefore not aware of their responsibility and are not fair. They do not accord to the responsibility. Financial damage was caused, among other things, by Biontech and Curevac's refusal to recognize and reward my priorities and inventive work. It is precisely on the basis of my inventions and my inventive activity that Biontech and Curevac have unjustly enriched themselves, unjustly because of concealment, manipulation of values and fraud, and people can be helped on the basis of my inventions, but through plagiarism and boycotts these companies damage and refrain from the possibilities to help and this contradicts the public promises made by these companies that these companies want to fight disease and help people. This also includes the lack of implementation options, personal opportunities that have not been developed and consequently both the omitted biomedical assistance for people and loss of income and missing income that has not occurred for me. With this income I would have the opportunity to implement my inventions, especially my inventions recognized by citations, and to help people. Biontech and Curevac have violated the following paragraphs of the law on copyright and related rights in Germany (Copyright Act, UrhG): 1, 2, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19 (4), 23, 51, 62, 63 , 63a, 70, 95a, 120, 124 and 129. Claims against Biontech and Curevac result from the following paragraphs of the UrhG: 97, 100, 101, 101a, 101b, 105, 106, 108, 108a and 108b. In addition, Biontech and Curevac have violated the following paragraphs of the law against unfair competition in Germany (UWG): 1, 3 (in particular the false statement about dangers to personal safety), 3a, 4, 4a, 5, 5a, 5b and 5c. Claims against Biontech and Curevac result from the following paragraphs of the UWG: 2, 8, 9 (damages), 10 (profit skimming) and 19. This means, among other things, that Biontech and Curevac must recognize and name me and my authorship, in particular my patent documents or scientific publications in the patent literature, and must compensate me and skim profits to me. Only paragraphs 1, 2, 7, 11, 12, 13 (acknowledgment of authorship), 14, 15, 19 (4), 23, 51 (obligation to quote), 62 (prohibition of change) and 63 (obligation to indicate the source) UrhG contain the duty to acknowledge my authorship, in particular of the new RNA technologies. Paragraph 13 UrhG “Recognition of authorship” reads: “The author has the right to have his authorship recognized in the work. He can determine whether the work should be given an author's attribution and which attribution should be used.” So Biontech and Curevac have to recognize me and my authorship. In addition, RNA immune stimulators must be referred to as immune stimulators. According to tje U.S. Code paragraphs mentioned above Biontech and Curevac must compensate for their fraud, concealing and unfair competition and they must be legally punished for their fraud, deceiving authorities, public and investors in the United States. Dipl.-Biol. Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Düsseldorf Tel: 0211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com Alexander Cherkasky's evidence about the Curevac and Biontech plagiarism i.e. infringement of copyright and thus fraud of investors, publicity and authorities First about me: I am an inventor and biologist, I have inventions for rejuvenation, regeneration and the fight against cancer, autoimmune diseases and viruses, among other things, was dubbed the "Second Einstein" in the press and I also have the optimal organizational solution, which I call the Institute for open discussion, open evaluation and implementation of inventions regardless of the inventor's status. There was an article about me in the Jüdische Allgemeine Zeitung (Jewish General Newspaper 24/05) "Der Inventor" and there were also articles about me in the Stern, in the Bild der Wissenschaft, the Neue Rhein Zeitung (NRZ), in the Rheinische Post (RP) , the Westdeutsche Zeitung (WZ) and the Laborjournal. I was born in Ukraine in 1981, in Germany since 1996 and have been patenting my inventions since 1998 when I was a student at the Goethe-Gymnasium in Dusseldorf. For my inventions against cancer, I was awarded the bronze medal "For Outstanding Achievements" and the honorary certificate of the largest international inventors' competition in Germany for over 60 years, IENA (Ideas-Inventions-New Products) 2003 in Nuremberg. Not much has changed since the article in the Laborjournal from 2016, except that there are not 27, but more than 70 mentions of my patent documents in the patent documents of companies, research institutes and universities from 11 countries (USA, Canada, Spain, Denmark, France, England, Japan, China, Switzerland, Belgium and Germany), most of which are mentioned in US patents. Among those named are large organizations such as INSERM and CNRS in France. Here is the partal list My published patent document WO2006/136892 was referenced in the patent documents EP2447277 and WO2012055985 (for anti-HIV vaccines) of the Spanish company Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve and the research organization Fundacio Privada Institut de Reserca de la SIDA-Caixa My patent document DE19925052 (against HIV, Corona and other viruses, i.e. in order to combat viruses in cells, either in infected cells or cells, that could be infected), was mentioned in the US Patent US9260471 of the American company Sirna Therapeutics (now part of Merck) DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9181551 of Sirna Therapeutics (Cambridge, MA) DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10351852 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10662428 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10889815 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9970005 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9771588 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9657294 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9994853 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10000754 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10508277 of Sirna Therapeutics DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9732344 of Leonid Beigelman (at Sirna Therapeutics) DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9738899 of Leonid Beigelman DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9957517 of Leonid Beigelman DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7999073 of the Swiss company Lonza DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7320859 of the German firm Amaxa sold to Lonza DE19937512 was mentioned in the US Patent US7163658 (for sequencing of nucleic acid sequences) of the American inventor Rouvain Bension DE19937512 mentioned in the US Patent US8153438 of Halcyon Molecular DE19937512 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia DE19929530 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7557182 of the Canadian firm Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7902156 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9713646 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9914754 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8710013 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828925 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828949 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8853353 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8921314 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8969310 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9161988 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9173891 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9365634 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9221867 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US10980892 of Angiochem DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9976133 of Michael Heller at the University of California DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8034766 of the American company E I du Pont de Nemours and Company and University College London DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8431526 of E I du Pont de Nemours and Company US20080242565 mentioned in the US Patent US8273694 of Yutomi, Inc., and of Americans Jeffrey Brown, Joseph Duimstra and Jason Wells DE10160248 (especially for the Fc-AChR fusion proteins against the autoimmune disease Myasthenia gravis) was mentioned in the US Patent US9243071 of the Japanese company Nihon Pharmaceutical DE10162870 mentioned in the US Patent US8679500 of the Institute National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) (Paris), Universite de Bretagne Occidentale (Brest, FR) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) (Paris) DE10162867 mentioned in the US Patent US8772254 of Devgen N.V. in Belgium US20070106066 (for anti-cancer fusion proteins) mentioned in the US Patent US10591486 of Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (Inserm) and Universite D'Evry-Val D'Essone (in France) US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US9493543 of the big Danish company Novo Nordisk. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US10766924 of the Japanese company JSR Corporation In 1999 and 2000 I took part in the "Jugend forscht" competition with theoretical solutions to problems against autoimmune diseases, Alzheimer's disease, cancer and viruses. I was told at the time that I should first do my Abitur and make diploma. In addition, me, the student of gymnasium, was presented with insurmountable obstacles and results of clinical studies costing millions were required of the student as a prerequisite for winning the "Jugend forscht" (Youth researchs). That was exclusion and the deliberate building up of insurmountable hurdles. In the meantime many millions have been made with my inventions, but without my participation. Biontech and Curevac plagiarize my inventions, but make mistakes because there are know-hows that only I know. If I was taken seriously, there would be no COVID-19 pandemic. The plagiarized company founded by Leonid Beigelman in the USA on the basis of my inventions was sold for 74.4 million dollars, and the company Amaxa, made in Germany on the basis of my inventions, was sold to the Swiss company Lonza for 97 million euros, the money passed by me. And these are just a few examples. My published patent documents claim priority and novelty worldwide and comprise the following inventions: cell therapies, (genetically modified cells producing neurotrophic factors for neural regenerations, DE19951694, claims 3 (VEGF) and 5 (BDNF), from the year 1999), fusion proteins comprising signal peptides, especially for anti-cancer therapeutic use (DE19951694, claims 4 and 9). genetically modified cells as traps for HIV and other viruses in order to combat viruses outside of cells, (DE19951694, claims 4 and 9), anti-cancer (oncolytic) viruses and genetically engineered anti-bacterial bacteriophages, (DE19818938 from the year 1998), fusion protein-nucleic acid complexes for gene therapies, (DE19925052), anti-cancer fusion proteins and fusion protein-nucleic acid complexes, (DE19925052 A1, DE10161899, DE10161870), anti-viral fusion protein-nucleic acid complexes in order to combat viruses in infected cells or in order to protect cells from infection, (DE19925052 A1, claim 16), fusion proteases for cleaving pathogenic proteins, (DE19822406), cleaving enzyme analogues for cleaving pathogenic proteins, (DE19953696), new materials with dispersed biomolecules, used also for batteries, (US20090070900), like-natural high quality synthetic diamonds, (DE102011010422, WO2012104722 and US20120199792), antibody-binding fusion proteins for therapy and diagnosis, especially for making highly sensitive detection systems for detection of pathogens, for example for food control, (US20080200652), personalized anti-cancer and anti-autoimmune fusion proteins, (DE102012015806), gene arranging and sequencing systems, (DE19929530, DE19937512), as well as other inventions. In the following it is proven that both companies, namely Curevac and Biontech used my intellectual property, i.e. plagiarized and knew about me, i.e. the idea plagiarism and fraud are intentional. It also follows from this that in particular fraud, forgery of documents, suppression of documents and false statements on the part of Curevac, in particular by Hopp, and Biontech, in particular by Sahin and Türeci, were and are detectable or verifiable and intentional. These companies make my inventions wrong, because only I have the appropriate know-hows. COVID is still not combated. They make mistakes and don't want to fix, to remedy, to remove those mistakes. Referring to the immune stimulators as "vaccines" is willfully misleading and there is intentionally and criminally no warning of the consequences of using the RNA-based immune stimulators and no warning of risks, that immune cells will attack healthy tissue, causing many dangerous side offects, and long-COVID-problems such as autoimmune reactions. Over 65 million persons suffer from long-COVID problems. This is reminiscent of Bayer's failure to warn that its "weed killer" glyphosate is, or may be, carcinogenic. Bayer has known about me since 1998 (the year I first wrote to Bayer) and since 1999 and 2000 (the years in which I took part in the "Jugend forscht" (Youth researchs) competition organized and coordinated by Bayer on behalf of the state and I presented my inventions against autoimmune diseases, immune complex diseases, Alzheimer's disease, cancer and viral diseases). Stern reported about me and my participation (the article about me from 03/25/1999, page 19) and called my problem solving revolution. Bayer employees called Stern and tried to have the article about me not appear, but Stern published the article anyway. That is, not the healing, but the suppression and concealment of my name was in the foreground for Bayer. Bayer sabotaged the commercial implementation of my inventions, similar to what Biontech and Curevac did, and that has already resulted in numerous people suffering from many diseases or dying. This means that Bayer also abused its position and deceived the public, patients, courts and authorities in the USA and Europe, among other places. Bayer's corresponding statements and the double standards include, in addition to fraud, false statements, forged documents, suppressed documents and aiding and abetting intentional killings, i.e. people dying of diseases and failure to provide assistance. In order to manipulate values on the stock exchange and deceive investors, Bayer paid 300 million euros to the plagiarism company Micromet, which developed the inventions that I presented at "Jugend forscht" in 2000. There were two journalistic investigations into Micromet's plagiarism of my inventions and Micromet's misconduct, as well as some other plagiarism companies, and these journalistic investigations were published as two articles about me (in the Neuen Rhein Zeitung (NRZ) of March 26, 2013 and in the Laborjournal of November 2016, pages 54-58. The methods of proving the plagiarism of Curevac and Biontech include the comparison of the relevant patent documents, in particular the priority dates and the corresponding descriptions or content. The evidence of intent consists in the relevant communication, from which it can be seen that Curevac and Biontech knew about me and my inventions, but intentionally concealed this information in the patent documents and public presentations as well as have kept secret in the statements to patients, investors, stock exchanges and authorities. This willful concealment includes the fraud, forgery and suppression of documents in order to manipulate values and unlawfully enrich themselves. The evidence about Biontech follows as a separate attachment after the evidence of Curevac's plagiarism and misconduct and fraud has been presented. Moderna is also one of the companies, using my intellectual property and infringing copyright. The combination by not mentioning my name and not naming my patent documents in the patent documents, public statements, presentations and other documents of Biontech and Curevac as well as ignoring or boycotting my person shows that these companies do not wish to combat the diseases, including cancer and autoimmune diseases. Aware of my cooperation proposals and my patent documents, Biontech and Curevac gave false testimonies and called themselves pioneers. If Biontech and Curevac really wanted to fight the diseases, they would name, acknowledge, respect and not hide my name, name and acknowledge my patent documents and my proposals or present them to the public and not hide them from the public. This is especially important because since 1998 I have been patenting and having and proposing programs of inventions to combat multiple diseases, and because I have both the optimal biological solutions and the optimal organizational solutions. One of the optimal organizational solutions is my suggestion of establishing the Institute for open discussion, open evaluation and implementation of inventions, regardless of the status of the inventor. Through this organizational solution, unique in the world, it will be possible to unite and coordinate the efforts of the inventors, patients, entrepreneurs, sponsors, investors and the governmental organizations as well as the biotech service companies to effectively fight diseases and to solve several other problems of humanity. The open development, unfolding of people's creative potentials (regardless of social or financial status) and the promotion, systematic support of the development of these creative potentials will make it possible to defeat diseases effectively and quickly. On the other hand, the repression, especially on the part of Bayer, Curevac and Biontech, is aimed at preventing diseases from being combated. Today's reality, in particular the misconduct of several companies and employees of companies such as Bayer, Curevac and Biontech, shows that the interests of the actual problem solvers, i.e. the inventors, and the interests of people suffering from diseases are unfortunately not in the foreground. This results in the paradox that on the one hand there are inventors and problem solvers, and on the other hand there are people who suffer from diseases and die and do not receive the appropriate biomedical help, although these people need this help and although this help exists, but is concealed, excluded, boycotted, sabotaged, suppressed and not made accessible. Now about Curevac's behavior: First a quote from my blog New Hope for People http://inventionsofalexandercherkasky.blogspot.com My published patent application DE10162867, (claims 3 and 6 (nucleic acid-protein complexes), also makes not new and not inventive the international patent application WO2012113513 (“Vaccine Composition Comprising Complex Immunostimulatory Nucleic Acids and Antigens Packaged with Disulfide-Liked Polyethyleneglycol/Peptide (!) Conjugates" of Curevac GmbH (DE), Patrick Baumhof (DE), Karl-Josef Kallen (DE), Mariola Fotin-Mleczek (DE); especially claim 1). Above mentioned Mariola Fotin-Mleczek (DE) as well as Rainer Fischer (DE), (Rainer Fischer knows my published inventions, also because I discussed my certain inventions with him), published a joint patent application MX2008008548 (“Peptides Useful as Cell-Penetrating Peptides” of Evonik Roehm GmbH), and this confirms relations and cooperative interconnections between some persons involved in plagiarism of my inventions. According to Der Spiegel (No. 42/15.10.2012, pp. 76-79), CureVac got 65 million euros and then 80 million euros (total 145 million euros) with help/share of Dietmar Hopp's biotech investment firm dievini. Spiegel wrote that CureVac received the highest investment a German biotech company ever received in a private financing round. CureVac is based in Tuebingen, is led by Ingmar Hoerr and is developing RNA-based therapies and vaccines for cancer and infectious diseases. All RNA-based therapies for cancer and infectious diseases are covered by my DE19925052A1 and DE10162867. Spiegel wrote incorrectly and wrongly that Hoerr first stabilized RNA and “incidentally” “discovered” the “meaning of RNA” (for therapy). A number of discoveries that I already made, (theoretically without a lab), were made “incidentally”. These discoveries include some formula and inventions “made by” Micromet, Halcyon Molecular (brothers Andregg), and the group of Terao, Washizu and Oana, (wounding long DNA sequences around the bobbins), (please see the blogs http://feasibilityofalexandercherkaskysinven .blogspot.de/ and http://alexandercherkasky.blogspot.com/ for more information). Thus, in addition to CureVac, (who got 145 million euro investment), Apogenix got 58.5 million euro investment, (also from dievini of Dietmar Hopp, as well as from the German Cancer Research Center, Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum (DKFZ), ( who denied me support and cooperation in 1998, (in reply from Dr. Ruth Herzog from May 28, 1998)), but DKFZ plagiaristically used my inventions and supported Apogenix and invested in it, (although examiners of the European Patent Office sent my DE10160248 as search report/search result to the patent applications of Apogenix and DKFZ EP1606318 (“Improved Fc Fusion Proteins”), WO2004/085478 and EP2004003239, i.e. DKFZ (from my letter to DKFZ in 1998) and Apogenix were aware about me and my inventions also from the search report of the European Patent Office". As can be seen from my blog and from this quote, Curevac was supported by Dietmar Hopp's investment company dievini. Der Spiegel reported on this ("Patience and Faith", No. 42/10/15/2012, pages 76-79). There was email correspondence in 2012 between me and Friedrich von Bohlen from the dievini company. So it follows that Hopp and dievini have known about me and my inventions since at least 2012. This is the corresponding correspondence translated from German: ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Alexander Cherkasky Date: Fri 2 Nov 2012 at 16 :10 am Subject: Re: Alexander Cherkasky To: Friedrich von Bohlen Cc: aggi.kibgis@dievini.com Dear Mr. von Bohlen, Thank you for your email. My patent documents are available in the databases. Please see the following links: http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&ST=advanced&IN=Cherkasky+Alexander&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=0&p=1&f=S&l=50&Query=cherkasky+&d=PG01 The following inventions are particularly relevant: 1. Novel Fc fusion proteins, which comprises my publication DE10160248 (http://worldwide .espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE10160248&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC) are being developed by Apogenix (Henning Walczak and in particular his publications EP1606318, WO2004/085478 and EP2004003239). This my publication DE10160248 was send to Mr. Walczak by the European Patent Office. Apogenix is or was funded by Dievini. Please comment. My patent application DE10160248 can be reinstated and also regardless of reinstatement, are the Fc fusion proteins no longer to be protected by Apogenix with the corresponding consequences for investors. 2. My novel antitumor fusion proteins, which are described in my patents DE10161899, DE10161738 and DE19925052, are certainly of particular interest to you. See the following links: http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE10161899&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE10161738&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB= EPODOC http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE19925052&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC 3. My patents for rapid genome sequencing DE102008037890, DE19929530 and DE19937512 are also of particular interest to you. See the following links http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE102008037890&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE19929530&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC http:// worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?compact=false&PN=DE19937512&ST=advanced&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC Certain confirmation achievements are available on my blogs http://feasibilityofalexandercherkaskysinven.blogspot.de/ http://alexandercherkasky.blogspot.com/ and http:// cherkaskyoffers.blogspot.com/. I would be pleased about your positive and timely answer. Best regards, Alexander Cherkasky On 11/1/12, Friedrich von Bohlen friedrich.bohlen@dievini.com wrote: Dear Mr. Cherkasky, Thank you for your mail. Anyway, it sounds very exciting. We only invest in companies that are already in clinical trials (therapeutics) or at least have a prototype (medical devices). We don't buy patents. However, our portfolio companies regularly carry out patent research and FTO analyzes and, if appropriate, acquire non-exclusive or exclusive rights to property rights of any kind. I assume that your patents are available in the relevant databases, so therefore also be taken into account in research. Maybe you can send me a brief overview/summary of your patents so that I can see if the content could fit at all. Best regards, Friedrich Bohlen -----Original message----- From: Alexander Cherkasky [mailto:alexcherkasky@googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 10:41 am To : Friedrich von Bohlen Cc: aggi.kibgis@dievini.com > Subject: Alexander Cherkasky Dear Herr von Bohlen, my name is Alexander Cherkasky, I am an inventor and biologist. You might be familiar with my name. I read the article "Patience and Faith" with great interest (Der Spiegel, no. 42/15.10.2012, p.76-79), which mainly talks about you, Mr. Hopp, Mr. Hettich and the Dievini company, and contact you with the proposal of cooperation. I have 8 German patents, more than 35 German patent applications, 5 US patent applications and 5 PCT international patent applications. My patented and published inventions include drugs for cancer, Alzheimer's disease, autoimmune, immune complex and metabolic diseases, as well as new devices and methods for rapid genome sequencing and multi-parallel diagnosis of various diseases. Stern, Bild der Wissenschaft, Rheinische Post, Westdeutsche Zeitung, Neue Rhein Zeitung and other media reported about me and my inventions. I was awarded the special health prize from BKK Krupp Thyssen+Partner (at "Jugend forscht" in 2000) in Düsseldorf, as well as the bronze medal "For outstanding achievements" and the certificate of honor from the largest international inventors' competition in Germany IENA (Ideas-Inventions-New Products) 2003 awarded in Nuremberg. Several of my inventions have been experimentally confirmed with and without naming my name. You can find more information on my blog http://feasibilityofalexandercherkaskysinven.blogspot.de/ My proposal for cooperation includes, firstly, possible joint company foundation(s) on the basis of my offered therapeutic, diagnostic and sequencing inventions, secondly, possible licensing of these inventions and thirdly, possible solutions to certain scientific and technical problems that you and your partner companies would like to see solved. I also propose to improve the quality of the intellectual property and the products (to be developed). I would be pleased about your positive and timely answer. Kind regards, Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (MSc.) Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Düsseldorf Tel: 0211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com On July 5, 2022, false statements were published on Curevac's website that CureVac N.V. (listed on the NASDAQ New York Stock Exchange: CVAC since August 2020) "will assert its intellectual property rights from more than two decades of pioneering work in mRNA technology that contributed to the development of COVID-19 vaccines. CureVac has filed a lawsuit against BioNTech SE and two of its subsidiaries at the Dusseldorf District Court, demanding fair compensation for the infringement of a number of CureVac's intellectual property rights such as EP 1 857 122 B1, DE 20 2015 009 961 U1, DE 20 2021 003 575 U1 and DE 20 2015 009 974 U1 used in the manufacture and sale of Comirnaty®, BioNTech and Pfizer's mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. However, CureVac does not seek an injunction, nor does it intend to take any legal action that could interfere with the production, sale or distribution of Comirnaty® by BioNTech and its partner Pfizer. CureVac's intellectual property portfolio protects several inventions considered essential to the design and development of BioNTech's SARS CoV-2 mRNA vaccines, among others. These relate to the engineering of mRNA molecules including sequence modifications to increase stability and improve protein expression, as well as the mRNA vaccine formulation specific to SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Over the past 22 years, CureVac has developed patented enabling technology related to mRNA design, delivery and manufacture that has been instrumental in the development of safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines. CureVac views the rapid development of these vaccines as a tremendous achievement that has had an exceptionally important impact on global public health. This success is based on decades of scientific research and innovation, backed by CureVac as the earliest pioneer (!?) of mRNA technology. Accordingly, in order to invest in advancing mRNA technology and new classes of life-saving drugs, intellectual property rights must be recognized and respected in the form of fair remuneration“. CureVac called itself "the earliest pioneer of mRNA technology". Writing about fairness, recognition, respect, "fair compensation" or remuneration, "fair", "earliest pioneer of mRNA technology" is fraud and that is false statement, fraudulent misrepresentation, forgery of documents and suppression of documents. Adhering to the boycott of me and my inventions, Curevac wants "fair remuneration" and the recognition and respect "to be able to invest in the further development of mRNA technology and new classes of life-saving drugs," according to the statement on Curevac's website on May 5 July 2022. Boycotting me and my priority and writing about “life saving drugs” is fraud and mockery. This is the sabotage of healing. Calling themselfes the "earliest pioneer", knowing about me and my inventions and suggestions and boycotting and concealing my name, my inventions and my suggestions - these are at least fraud, fraud on the part of the investors, fraud on the stock exchange, fraud on the part of the district court of Dusseldorf, fraud of authories and of many countries, especially the USA, fraud of SEC and NASDAQ, and that is willful fraud and is the willful forgery of documents, false statements and suppression of documents. This is deception and manipulation, manipulation of values. Through fraud, deception or malicious deception, falsification of documents and suppression of documents, Curevac, dievini and Hopp lured 48 million euros from Bill Gates, 300 million euros from the German state and funds (over one billion US dollar) from investors on the NASDAQ stock exchange. Thus, not only financiers, but also patients, SEC, and the district court of Dusseldorf were cheated, although the district court of Dusseldorf does not wish to investigate fraud. Here we compare the patent documents that are publicly available in the patent literature databases. My patent document DE19925052 A1 (filing date: June 1, 1999, disclosure date: December 7, 2000) describes mRNA-protein complexes (e.g. claim 16, page 5, line 23; page 6, lines 27-30, 55). tRNA is mentioned on page 3 (line 41). On the same page membrane penetration peptides are mentioned (line 31). My patent document DE19929530 A1 (filing date: June 28, 1999, disclosure date: January 4, 2001) discloses nucleic acid sequences (in particular DNA) which have polyA or polyT sequences at both ends (column 3, lines 44-52, 58, 59; column 4 , lines 4, 40, 50; column 9, line 19, claims 7, 11, 13, 17). My patent application, i.e. patent document DE19937512 A1 (filing date: 08/09/1999, disclosure date: 02/15/2001) discloses nucleic acid sequences (in particular DNA) which are ligated or connected to the two ends with polyG or polyC sequences (column 2, line 37 ; column 3, lines 10, 41). My patent document DE19951694 (filing date: October 27, 1999, disclosure date: May 3, 2001) discloses, inter alia, expressed antiviral RNA (column 3, lines 32, 41; column 4, line 12; claim 11) and (poly)peptides with a signal sequence and/or or with a membrane penetration domain (column 3, line 45; claims 4, 9) and a transgene for a particular RNA produced in a cell (column 5, lines 20-22). My patent document DE10162867 (filing date: December 20, 2001, disclosure date: July 22, 2004) discloses, inter alia, mRNA-protein complexes or mRNA-fusion protein complexes (e.g. claims 3 and 6) and nucleic acids which comprise or have one or two regions and are ligated or connected to one or two nucleic acid regions which are recognized or bound by RNA binding domains of the proteins (claim 7). This claim alone includes all nucleic acid molecules, in particular all RNA molecules, which were later used as “vaccines” or immune stimulators. My patent document DE10202191 (filing date: 01/22/2002, disclosure date: 08/07/2003) discloses, inter alia, nucleic acid sequences comprising polyG:C sequences between specific regions (column 2, lines 31-36), virus-specific receptors and nucleic acid-binding domains (column 6, lines 65 and 66), DNA sequence containing a specific region for binding and a non-specific region, such as Poly G-C (column 10, lines 15-17), a possibility of chemically stabilizing a nucleic acid sequence (column 15, lines 5-14) and nucleic acids with unspecific regions such as poly G:C (column 16, lines 10). Claim 9 includes synthetic or natural nucleic acids, characterized in that they contain at least one specific recognition site for the recognition or binding of individual biomolecules and these nucleic acids have these recognition site either in the middle or at both ends or in another region. This claim 9 alone (column 17, lines 30-35) encompasses all nucleic acid sequences that have been used and are still used as "vaccines" or immune stimulators. My patent document DE102007027596 (filing date: June 12, 2007, disclosure date: January 29, 2009) includes all chemically modified nucleic acids (claims 6 and 8). In particular, these publications of mine in the patent literature do not make the "intellectual property" of Curevac and Biontech as well as Moderna new and not inventive. Patents granted by mistake or intentionally by the examiner can be invalidated (e.g. through reexamination in the USA or through nullity actions at the Munich District Court). Not even one of the patent documents of mine mentioned above was mentioned as prior art in a patent document from Curevac and Biontech, although Hopp, dievini and Curevac as well as Sahin, Türeci and Biontech knew about me and my earlier work. Instead of acknowledging my publications, the concealment and suppression of documents took place in combination with fraud, falsification of documents and false statements, in the awareness of the inadmissibility of using false documents. If my work were named and thus recognized, there would be no claims of alleged "pioneering" by Curevac and Biontech and I would share in the recognition of my inventive work. It is precisely this participation that Biontech and Curevac wanted to prevent, which is why I have to struggle with systematic exclusion. As a result, the commercial implementation of several of my inventions was systematically suppressed and this has already led to numerous human victims of diseases. These people are suffering or have died from diseases simply because these people have not received my innovative biomedical help. These people did not receive this help in particular because Biontech and Curevac deliberately withheld, conceal my name and my publications and therefore do not recognize them and consequently fraudulently deceive the public, investors and authorities, i.e. Biontech and Curevac systematicaly cheat. The strategy behind this is that they only care about the money, money without healing, and I care about the healing and about the money. I emphasize that if the companies Biontech and Curevac were really concerned with healing, they would recognize my work, name it, not ignore me and accept my proposals for cooperation with gratitude and enthusiasm, and only I have the appropriate know-how and can solve the numerous problems. E.g. the following patent documents of Curevac are not new and not inventive because of my patent documents mentioned above: EP1857122 (claimed "priority" of 05/06/2001 (content of the 2001 file is unknown, which raises questions) and of 05/06/2002) for a modified one mRNA with an increased G/C content, tRNA and modified mRNA with a "polyA tail" (claim 6, EP1857122 A2) is not new and not inventive because of my above described patent documents DE19925052, DE19929530, DE19937512 and DE19951694, all of 1999. Curevac described nucleic acid sequences comprising different regions including "a heterologous untranslated region (UTR)", "G/C-optimized coding sequence", "poly(A) sequence", "poly(C) sequence" in his DE112021000012 (dated 2021), "an open reading frame (ORF)", "an untranslated region (UTR) comprising at least two separate poly(A) sequences", "a poly(A) sequence", "a poly(C ) sequence" (DE202015009974 U1 (U1 indicates utility model without examination) from 2014 and DE202015009961 U1 from 2014 and DE202021003575U1 from 2021), which are also not new and not inventive because of my publications described above. This also applies to the publication WO2012113513 by Curevac (from 2011) for mRNA-protein complexes and for polypeptides containing signal peptides or cell penetration peptides (claim 9). Doing something like this, organizing such publications in the patent literature, knowing about my work, i.e. published earlier patent documents, and intentionally concealing or not naming my patent documents, is at least a waste of investor funds on the part of Curevac. The intentional concealment involves the fraud described above. This results in Curevac's lack of desire to fight the diseases. This desire to fight the diseases is also missing at Biontech. My patent documents are publications and remain state of the art and are therefore priority-claiming and novelty-damaging worldwide, i.e. they must be named and taken into account. They must be recognized. My patent applications DE10162870, DE10162867 and DE10202191 were rejected by the examiner Dr. Christa Pitsch-Machacek at the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA). The fraud of American investors, authorities and public is aided and abetted by the German Patent and Trademark Office and its president Cornelia Rudloff-Schäffer also because the German Patent Office has double standards, supports plagiaristic german firms and suppresses and slanders inventors. My patent applications DE19951694 and DE102012015806 were rejected by the examiner Dr. Leonard Riedel, arbitrarily rejected at the DPMA. These arbitrary rejections were the systematic exclusion of me from the opportunity to protect and commercially implement my intellectual property and to participate in the economic success of my inventions and these rejections have helped the plagiaristic companies. This was promoting unfair competition and aiding in the deception of investors and many countries. The arbitrary rejection of my patent applications was also the DPMA's contribution to destroying values, boycotting and excluding me so as not to pay me for my intellectual property. This discriminatory misconduct of the officials at the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA) shows the desire not to fight the diseases, not to heal the people, but rather to encourage the misconduct of certain plagiarisitc companies and to encourage these companies through the suppression, concealment, slandering, discrimination and exclusion of my person and my proposals to help plagiaristic use and deceiving with unfair competition. These officials, like Rudloff-Schäfer, Pitsch-Machacek, favor Riedel's pseudo-scientific nature, which consists in particular in the fact that he wrote that my experiments were "not expensive enough". This is definitely a pseudo-scientific assertion by Riedel, or an assertion that has nothing to do with the patent law created for the inventors and this assertion cannot be proven, because to prove such a statement you would need a pseudo-scientific scale where you should justify (which is impossible), which experiments are "expensive" or "expensive enough" or should be considered "expensive enough" or "not expensive enough" and why, from a scientific point of view, such "justifications" or claims as to what "expensive" or " would be expensive enough" would apply. First, Riedel discriminated against me and thus systematically violated the Basic Law and the Patent Act, in which he arbitrarily, illegally and contrary to his duty set impossible and insurmountable hurdles for the granting of patents, namely in which he demanded the experimental results, even called for clinical studies, which, as I said, is purely arbitrary. After submission of confirming experimental results he stated that my experiments are "not expensive enough". And that is just one example of the pseudo-scientific approach and the falsehoods and falsifications or false certifications Riedel's and Pitsch-Machacek's, which his systematic arbitrariness systematically favors, especially in the interest of the plagiarism companies in order to exclude me through this unfair competition. Riedel also ignored the fact that according to analogies and according to information and naming of my patent documents by other researchers at different companies and universities, my inventions can be implemented and are patentable. Riedel also systematically disadvantaged my inventions against viruses, including those against corona viruses and HIV. This has also led to society's current helplessness in the fight against viruses. What all of these individuals are doing is conducting millions of people die from diseases. These are crimes against humanity. This is also aid to economic damage in the billions. Mrs. Pitsch-Machacek systematically favored the arbitrariness, fraud, false certification in office and omission of the examinations on the part of Riedel, and she assured the President of the German Patent and Trademark Office, Mrs. Rudloff-Schäffer, and myself on August 2, 2011 that she or Pitsch-Machacek does not know the Micromet company, Mrs. Pitsch-Machacek does not know this company either privately or professionally. I found the list of German patent documents of Micromet, (the company that cheated several investors and took over for the money raised from investors and became part of Amgen), and its then research manager Patrick Baeuerle in the patent literature databases and at the German patent and trademark office and found out that Pitsch-Machacek was the examiner for several files from Micromet and its former research manager Patrick Baeuerle. These files are or have the file numbers DE4311835 from Patrick Baeuerle and DE60203324, DE69911793, DE69909459 and DE69233068 from Micromet. It follows that Mrs. Pitsch-Machacek lied to the President of the German Patent and Trademark Office, Mrs. Rudloff-Schäffer and me, or deceived, because Pitsch-Machacek's assurance that Mrs. Pitsch-Machacek did not know Micromet was wrong, is untrue or not applicable. This is the false certification in the office and these are document forgery and fraud. Rudloff-Schäffer's claim that she checked the matter also represents false certification in the office, because if she checked the matter, she would also find what I found. This finding of false certifications in the office leads to the finding that the officials involved at the German Patent and Trademark Office DPMA have double standards, discriminate and exclude inventors, favor plagiaristic companies and their systematic fraud of investors, public and authorities in the United States and they work directly in the interests of the companies or for companies, and sabotage the granting of patents for inventors in order to use substances that do not work, or are dangerous or are not very effective, and to prevent causal or cause-fighting therapies and their implementation. These people are therefore partly to blame for the lack of opportunities to fight the viruses such as HIV. --------- Forwarded message --------- From: Date: Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 3:24 p.m. Subject: alexcherkasky@ googlemail.com To: Date: Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 3:24 p.m. Subject: Alexander Cherkasky To: --------- Forwarded message --------- Von: Date: Fr., 29. Okt. 2021 um 15:24 Uhr Subject: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com To: Vielen Dank für Ihre Anfrage Sehr geehrte Absenderin, sehr geehrter Absender, wir haben Ihre Nachricht erhalten und werden diese schnellstmöglich beantworten. Bitte haben Sie Verständnis dafür, dass dies einige Zeit in Anspruch nehmen kann. Informationen finden Sie auch auf unserer Website www.biontech.de – viele Fragen werden hier bereits beantwortet. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Ihr BioNTech-Team Bitte antworten Sie nicht direkt auf die E-Mail – diese ist nicht für eingehende Nachrichten eingerichtet. Antwort-E-Mails werden nicht gelesen oder bearbeitet. Thank you for your request Dear Sender, We have received your message and will reply as soon as possible. Please be aware that this may take some time. You can also find more information on our website www.biontech.de - where many of your frequently asked questions have already been answered. Yours sincerely, Your BioNTech team ---------- Forwarded message --------- Von: Alexander Cherkasky Date: Fr., 29. Okt. 2021 um 15:24 Uhr Subject: Alexander Cherkasky To: Dear Dr. Türeci, my name, Alexander Cherkasky, is probably known to you, because the key technologies that you and Biontech are developing are not new and not inventive because of my published patent documents, which are novelty-destroying and priority-claiming worldwide. You also know that your company makes many mistakes and you wish to solve the numerous problems and this is possible only in cooperation with me. I have solutions and know-how and only with me it will be possible to fight several diseases, including viruses, including HIV/AIDS and COVID-19, as well as cancer and autoimmune diseases, to make regeneration and rejuvenation a reality, to reduce the disadvantage of inventors and correct numerous mistakes, to help many people and to make a lot of money, as well as to get several Nobel Prizes together, I emphasize together. I am an inventor, biologist, author of books and articles, was called the "second Einstein" in the press, and there were press articles about me and my inventions in, among others, Stern, Bild der Wissenschaft, the Neue Rhein Zeitung (NRZ), in the Rheinische Post (RP), the Westdeutsche Zeitung (WZ) and the Laborjournal. I have inventions to rejuvenate, regenerate and fight cancer, autoimmune diseases and against viruses such as corona viruses and HIV. My inventions also include new multi-parallel diagnostic systems and high quality synthetic diamond and new materials. Here are the proofs of Biontech's plagiarism: I ask you to consider that the works of the developers of the RNA vaccines against COVID-19, are not novel and not inventive because of my published prior patent documents claiming priority and novelty worldwide. My published German patent document DE10162867 (from the year 2001, page 3, claim 7) discloses RNA sequences comprising regions for binding by proteins or their RNA-binding domains. PolyA sequences are disclosed in my patent document DE19929530 A1 (from the year 1999, column 3). Chemically modified RNA sequences are disclosed in my patent document DE102007027596 (from the year 2007, claim 8). Patient-specific, i.e. individualized, especially anti-cancer fusion proteins are disclosed in my patent document DE102012015806. T-cell engaging bispecific single-chain antibodies for targeted immunotherapy of tumors are disclosed in my patent documents DE10162870 (from the year 2001), DE10161739, DE10161899, DE10161738 (all from the year 2001) and DE19925052 (from the year 1999). The corresponding publications can be found for example in the data banks for patent literature, such as Google Patents and Espacenet. For my inventions against cancer, I was awarded the bronze medal "For Outstanding Achievements" and the honorary certificate of the largest international inventors' competition in Germany for over 60 years, IENA (Ideas-Inventions-New Products) 2003 in Nuremberg. The following articles about me are certainly interesting for you: http://www.nrz.de/staedte/duesseldorf/erfinder-klagt-die-pharma-industrie-an-id7767418.html http://www.laborjournal.de/ epaper/LJ_16_11.pdf (from November 2016, pages 54-58) Not much has changed since the article in Laborjournal from 2016, except that there are not 27, but over 70 mentions of my patent documents in the patent documents of companies, research institutes and universities from 11 countries (USA, Canada, Spain, Denmark, France, England, Japan, China, Switzerland, Belgium and Germany), most of which are named in US patents. Among those named are large organizations such as INSERM and CNRS in France. This is the portial list: 1. My published patent document WO2006/136892 was referenced in the patent documents EP2447277 and WO2012055985 (for anti-HIV vaccines) of the Spanish company Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve and the research organization Fundacio Privada Institut de Reserca de la SIDA-Caixa 2.My patent document DE19925052 (against HIV, Corona and other viruses, i.e. in order to combat viruses in cells, either in infected cells or cells, that could be infected), was mentioned in the US Patent US9260471 of the American company Sirna Therapeutics (now part of Merck) 3. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9181551 of Sirna Therapeutics (Cambridge, MA) 4. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10351852 of Sirna Therapeutics 5. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10662428 of Sirna Therapeutics 6. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10889815 of Sirna Therapeutics 7. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9970005 of Sirna Therapeutics 8. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9771588 of Sirna Therapeutics 9. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9657294 of Sirna Therapeutics 10. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9994853 of Sirna Therapeutics 11. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10000754 of Sirna Therapeutics 12. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10508277 of Sirna Therapeutics 13. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9732344 of Leonid Beigelman (at Sirna Therapeutics) 14. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9738899 of Leonid Beigelman 15. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9957517 of Leonid Beigelman 16. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7999073 of the Swiss company Lonza 17. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7320859 of the German firm Amaxa sold to Lonza 18. DE19937512 was mentioned in the US Patent US7163658 (for sequencing of nucleic acid sequences) of the American inventor Rouvain Bension 19. DE19937512 mentioned in the US Patent US8153438 of Halcyon Molecular 20. DE19937512 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia 21. DE19929530 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia 22. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7557182 of the Canadian firm Angiochem 23. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7902156 of Angiochem 24. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9713646 of Angiochem 25. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9914754 of Angiochem 26. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8710013 of Angiochem 27. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828925 of Angiochem 28. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828949 of Angiochem 29. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8853353 of Angiochem 30. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8921314 of Angiochem 31. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8969310 of Angiochem 32. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9161988 of Angiochem 33. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9173891 of Angiochem 34. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9365634 of Angiochem 35. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9221867 of Angiochem 36. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US10980892 of Angiochem 37. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9976133 of Michael Heller at the University of California 38. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8034766 of the American company E I du Pont de Nemours and Company and University College London 39. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8431526 of E I du Pont de Nemours and Company 40. US20080242565 mentioned in the US Patent US8273694 of Yutomi, Inc., and of Americans Jeffrey Brown, Joseph Duimstra and Jason Wells 41. DE10160248 (especially for the Fc-AChR fusion proteins against the autoimmune disease Myasthenia gravis) was mentioned in the US Patent US9243071 of the Japanese company Nihon Pharmaceutical 42. DE10162870 mentioned in the US Patent US8679500 of the Institute National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) (Paris), Universite de Bretagne Occidentale (Brest, FR) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) (Paris) 43. DE10162867 mentioned in the US Patent US8772254 of Devgen N.V. in Belgium 44. US20070106066 (for anti-cancer fusion proteins) mentioned in the US Patent US10591486 of Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (Inserm) and Universite D'Evry-Val D'Essone (in France) 45. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US9493543 of the big Danish company Novo Nordisk. 46. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US10766924 of the Japanese company JSR Corporation I will be happy to get a positive and timely reply from you. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (MSc.) Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Dusseldorf Germany Tel: +49 (0)211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: von Wersebe, Nike Date: Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 09:58 Subject: AW: Alexander Cherkasky To: Alexander Cherkasky Cc: Faber.Tina , von Wersebe, Nike Dear Mr. Cherkasky, the association of friends and sponsors is the trustee of the Paul Ehrlich Foundation. We rightly have no influence on the selection of the award winners. In addition, there is no entitlement to the Paul Ehrlich Prize. I would therefore ask you to refrain from further messages to us. Sincerely, Nike v. Wersebe Nike von Wersebe Managing Director Friends and Sponsors of the Goethe University Goethe University Frankfurt | Campus Westend Theodor-W.-Adorno-Platz 1 D-60629 Frankfurt am Main Telephone +49 (69) 798 12234 | Mobile 0170 21 33 797 | Fax +49 (69) 798 763 12234 Email: Wersebe@vff.uni-frankfurt.de Become a member - The Association of Friends and Sponsors of Goethe University From: Alexander Cherkasky Sent: Monday , November 8, 2021 2:30 p.m. To: von Wersebe, Nike Subject: Fwd: Alexander Cherkasky Dear Ms. Wersebe, I am sending you the copy of my second letter to Professor Boehm and expect an answer from you and from him. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (M.Sc.) Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Dusseldorf Germany Tel: +49 211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com ---------- Forwarded message --------- Von: Alexander Cherkasky Date: Mo., 8. Nov. 2021 um 14:28 Uhr Subject: Re: Alexander Cherkasky To: Dear Professor Boehm, when will you answer me? Many people are suffering and dying from COVID-19, the pandemic is not defeated, Biontech makes mistakes, don't answer me, you are an immunologist, honor Biontech, know about me about Biontech's plagiarism and about the fact that Biontech makes mistakes, and by ignoring my letter you show that you have little interest in fighting the pandemic, because if it had been different you would have wanted to communicate with me and support me. Given the pandemic situation and from an ethical, legal and scientific point of view, it is at least irresponsible to behave in a boycotting and negative way towards me. Sincerely Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (M.Sc.) Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Düsseldorf Germany Tel: +49 211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com Am Fr., 15. Okt. 2021 um 15:11 Uhr schrieb Alexander Cherkasky : Dear Professor Boehm, As we discussed on the phone, I am sending you this letter. My name is Alexander Cherkasky, I am an inventor, biologist and author of books and articles. I ask you to consider that the works of Ugur Sahin, Özlem Türeci and Katalin Kariko, the developers of the RNA vaccines against COVID-19, are not novel and not inventive because of my published prior patent documents claiming priority and novelty worldwide. My published German patent document DE10162867 (from the year 2001, page 3, claim 7) discloses RNA sequences comprising regions for binding by proteins or their RNA-binding domains. PolyA-Sequences are disclosed in my patent document DE19929530 A1 (from the year 1999, column 3). Chemically modified RNA sequences are disclosed in my patent document DE102007027596 (from the year 2007, claim 8). Patient-specific, i.e. individualized, especially anti-cancer fusion proteins are disclosed in my patent document DE102012015806. T-cell engaging bispecific single-chain antibodies for targeted immunotherapy of tumors are disclosed in my patent documents DE10162870 (from the year 2001), DE10161739, DE10161899, DE10161738 (all from the year 2001) and DE19925052 (from the year 1999). The corresponding publications can be found for example in the data banks for patent literature, such as Google Patents and Espacenet. I got the bronze medal “For Outstanding Achievements” and the Honorary Certificate at the (largest in Germany) inventors competition IENA (Ideas-Inventions-New Products) 2003 in Nuremberg. I propose the optimal biological and organizational solutions in order to combat the Coronavirus and other viruses. The organizational solution is the creation of the new and worldwide unique Institute for Open Discussion, Open Evaluation and Realization of Inventions Independently from Status of Inventors, in order to unite and coordinate the efforts of inventors, governmental organizations, investors, sponsors, entrepreneurs, patients and service biotechnological companies. My optimal biological solutions are my inventions and know-hows in order to combat viruses in and outside of cells. The following are two links to the articles (in German) about me in Laborjournal and New Rhein Newspaper and links to some of my blogs: http://www.nrz.de/staedte/duesseldorf/erfinder-klagt-die-pharma-industrie-an-id7767418.html http://www.laborjournal.de/epaper/LJ_16_11.pdf (54-58) http://aboutalexandercherkasky.blogspot.de/ http://patentlawisbasedontorah.blogspot.de/ http://cherkaskytorahresearch.blogspot.de/ http://toraandalexandercherkasky.blogspot.de/ My patent documents were used, confirmed and referenced in over 50 patent documents, including the US patents of companies, universities and research organizations from 11 countries. The following is the partial list of the patent documents of companies, institutes and universities (in 11 countries, in The USA, Canada, Spain, Denmark, France, UK, Japan, China, Switzerland, Belgium and Germany), referencing my patent documents and thus confirming their feasibility: 1. My published patent document WO2006/136892 was referenced in the patent documents EP2447277 and WO2012055985 (for anti-HIV vaccines) of the Spanish company Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve and the research organization Fundacio Privada Institut de Reserca de la SIDA-Caixa 2. My patent document DE19925052 (against HIV, Corona and other viruses, i.e. in order to combat viruses in cells, either in infected cells or cells, that could be infected), was mentioned in the US Patent US9260471 of the American company Sirna Therapeutics (now part of Merck) 3. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9181551 of Sirna Therapeutics (Cambridge, MA) 4. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10351852 of Sirna Therapeutics 5. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9970005 of Sirna Therapeutics 6. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9771588 of Sirna Therapeutics 7. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9657294 of Sirna Therapeutics 8. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9994853 of Sirna Therapeutics 9. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10000754 of Sirna Therapeutics 10. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10508277 of Sirna Therapeutics 11. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9732344 of Leonid Beigelman (was at Sirna Therapeutics) 12. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9738899 of Leonid Beigelman 13. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9957517 of Leonid Beigelman 14. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7999073 of the Swiss company Lonza 15. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7320859 of the German firm Amaxa sold to Lonza 16. DE19937512 was mentioned in the US Patent US7163658 (for sequencing of nucleic acid sequences) of the American inventor Rouvain Bension 17. DE19937512 mentioned in the US Patent US8153438 of Halcyon Molecular 18. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7557182 of the Canadian firm Angiochem 19. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7902156 of Angiochem 20. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9713646 of Angiochem 21. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9914754 of Angiochem 22. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8710013 of Angiochem 23. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828925 of Angiochem 24. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828949 of Angiochem 25. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8853353 of Angiochem 26. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8921314 of Angiochem 27. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8969310 of Angiochem 28. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9161988 of Angiochem 29. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9173891 of Angiochem 30. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9365634 of Angiochem 31. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9221867 of Angiochem 32. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9976133 of Michael Heller at the University of California 33. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8034766 of the American company E I du Pont de Nemours and Company and University College London 34. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8431526 of E I du Pont de Nemours and Company 35. US20080242565 mentioned in the US Patent US8273694 of Yutomi, Inc., and of Americans Jeffrey Brown, Joseph Duimstra and Jason Wells 36. DE10160248 (especially for the Fc-AChR fusion proteins against the autoimmune disease Myasthenia gravis) was mentioned in the US Patent US9243071 of the Japanese company Nihon Pharmaceutical 37. DE10162870 mentioned in the US Patent US8679500 of the Institute National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) (Paris), Universite de Bretagne Occidentale (Brest, FR) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) (Paris) 38. DE10162867 mentioned in the US Patent US8772254 of Devgen N.V. in Belgium 39. US20070106066 (for anti-cancer fusion proteins) mentioned in the US Patent US10591486 of Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (Inserm) and Universite D'Evry-Val D'Essone (in France) 40. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US9493543 of the big Danish company Novo Nordisk. 41. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US10766924 of the Japanese company JSR Corporation Please contact me as soon as possible in order to discuss possibilities of cooperation for the rescue of many people. I have also inventions against cancer and autoimmune diseases and for tissue regeneration and for rejuvenation. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (MSc.) Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Dusseldorf Germany Tel: +49 (0)211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com Forwarded message --------- From: Alexander Cherkasky Date: Thu Oct 26, 2017 03:01 PM Subject: Re: Alexander Cherkasky To: Dear Mrs. Heinen, if Ugur Sahin does not answer me within five working days, I will make a blog and prove Sahin's plagiarism. Kind regards, Alexander Cherkasky On October 24, 2017 at 4:08 p.m., Alexander Cherkasky wrote : Dear Ms. Heinen, when could you or Mr. Sahin reply? Mr. Sahin should recognize the importance of my email. Kind regards, Alexander Cherkasky On September 25, 2017 at 11:40 am, Alexander Cherkasky wrote : Dear Ms. Heinen, thank you. Please ask Mr. Sahin when he could reply to my previous email. This is very important. Please find a copy of this email below. Thanks again. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- From: Alexander Cherkasky Date: Sep 18, 2017 at 5:34 PM Subject: Alexander Cherkasky To: helma.heinen@tron-mainz.de Dear Ms. Heinen, please discuss my following letter with Mr. Ugur Sahin. This is very important. I would be pleased about your positive and timely answer. Kind regards, Alexander Cherkasky Dear Dr. Sahin, I read the article "Everyone has their own drug" (Der Spiegel, 28/2017, p. 80-81) about you and I am convinced that you will be interested in working with me, especially in the proposed joint economic implementation of the products according to my patent documents DE102012015806 for individualistic patient-specific fusion proteins and DE19925052, DE10161899, DE10161738, DE10162870 and DE10162867 for fusion proteins and fusion protein-RNA complexes against cancer. I am a biologist and inventor, and Stern, Bild der Wissenschaft, Laborjournal, Neue Rhein Zeitung, Rheinische Post and Westdeutsche Zeitung, among others, wrote about me. My inventions include new materials (such as high-quality synthetic diamonds), new therapies against viruses, autoimmune diseases and cancer, and inventions for regeneration and rejuvenation. My patent documents have been mentioned in the patent documents of companies and research institutes from 10 countries. The references can be viewed, for example, in Google Patents, Espacenet and in the database of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). I would appreciate your positive and timely reply. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. (M.Sc.) Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Düsseldorf Tel: 0211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com http://plagiaristsahinandbiontech.blogspot.com/2018/01/plagiaristic-ugur-sahin-and-his-firm.html - Januar 18, 2018 Plagiaristic Ugur Sahin and his firm Biontech Ugur Sahin did not responded to my letters in which I stated Sahin's plagiarism. Thus Sahin wishes to conceal his plagiarism. For example the following patent documents, in which Ugur Sahin is mentioned as „inventor“ and Biontech as „applicant“ are not new and not inventive because of my according prior German patent documents claiming priority worldwide, (and thus Sahin's or Biontech's descriptions can not be patents or can be invalidated if patents would be granted by error of examiners): 1). CA2971950 „Cytokine Fusion Proteins“ (2016, also published as AU2016207955, WO2016112983 and WO2016113395) describes fusion proteins with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and is not new and not inventive because of my German patent DE10161899 (from 2001) for TNF fusion proteins. 2). SG11201704597W „Agonistic TNF Receptor binding agents“ (2015 and 2016, also published as AU2016205974, CA2969888 and WO2016110584) are also not new and not inventive because of my above mentioned DE10161899. 3). AU2015335054 „Methods and compositions for diagnosis and treatment of cancer“ (especially claim 1, (ribozyme, antisense RNA, other RNA), claim 3 (ligand of a tumor antigen attached to cytotoxin or cytotoxic enzyme), claim 5, 8 (chimeric antibody), 9 (The pharmaceutical composition as claimed in any of claims 5 to 8 which is in the form of a therapeutic or prophylactic tumor vaccine), 18 (chimeric antibody) and 19 (A conjugate between an agent as claimed in claim 18 and a therapeutic effector moiety), 2014, also published as EP3209696, WO2016062323 and WO2016062659) are not new and not inventive because of my German patents DE10161899 (from 2001), DE10161738 (2001), DE19925052 (1999) as well as my patent documents DE10162870 (2001) and DE10160248 (2001). 4). AU2017213515 „Individualized vaccines for cancer“ (especially claim 22 (A vaccine comprising a recombinant polypeptide (!) comprising (!) mutation based neo epitopes, the neo-epitopes, the neo-epitopes resulting from cancer specific somatic mutations in a tumor specimen of a cancer patient, or a nucleic acid encoding the polypeptide) and claim 23 (The vaccine according to claim 22, wherein the polypeptide further (!) comprises epitopes not containing cancer specific somatic mutation which are expressed by cancer cells)) is not new and not inventive because of my DE2012015806 (from 2012) for individualized anticancer fusion proteins, as well as because of my patent documents mentioned above, especially DE10162870. Alexander Cherkasky Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com Alexander Cherkasky vor 3 Jahren (Estimation, Assessment made 3 Jears ago and conceled by Biontech in order to deceive investors, authorities and publicity). Plagiaristic Ugur Sahin and his firm Biontech Ugur Sahin did not responded to my letters in which I stated Sahin's plagiarism. Thus Sahin wishes to conceal his plagiarism. For example the following patent documents, in which Ugur Sahin is mentioned as „inventor“ and Biontech as „applicant“ are not new and not inventive because of my according prior German patent documents claiming priority worldwide, (and thus Sahin's or Biontech's descriptions can not be patents or can be invalidated if patents would be granted by error of examiners): 1). CA2971950 „Cytokine Fusion Proteins“ (2016, also published as AU2016207955, WO2016112983 and WO2016113395) describes fusion proteins with tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and is not new and not inventive because of my German patent DE10161899 (from 2001) for TNF fusion proteins. 2). SG11201704597W „Agonistic TNF Receptor binding agents“ (2015 and 2016, also published as AU2016205974, CA2969888 and WO2016110584) are also not new and not inventive because of my above mentioned DE10161899. 3). AU2015335054 „Methods and compositions for diagnosis and treatment of cancer“ (especially claim 1, (ribozyme, antisense RNA, other RNA), claim 3 (ligand of a tumor antigen attached to cytotoxin or cytotoxic enzyme), claim 5, 8 (chimeric antibody), 9 (The pharmaceutical composition as claimed in any of claims 5 to 8 which is in the form of a therapeutic or prophylactic tumor vaccine), 18 (chimeric antibody) and 19 (A conjugate between an agent as claimed in claim 18 and a therapeutic effector moiety), 2014, also published as EP3209696, WO2016062323 and WO2016062659) are not new and not inventive because of my German patents DE10161899 (from 2001), DE10161738 (2001), DE19925052 (1999) as well as my patent documents DE10162870 (2001) and DE10160248 (2001). 4). AU2017213515 „Individualized vaccines for cancer“ (especially claim 22 (A vaccine comprising a recombinant polypeptide (!) comprising (!) mutation based neo epitopes, the neo-epitopes, the neo-epitopes resulting from cancer specific somatic mutations in a tumor specimen of a cancer patient, or a nucleic acid encoding the polypeptide) and claim 23 (The vaccine according to claim 22, wherein the polypeptide further (!) comprises epitopes not containing cancer specific somatic mutation which are expressed by cancer cells)) is not new and not inventive because of my DE2012015806 (from 2012) for individualized anticancer fusion proteins, as well as because of my patent documents mentioned above, especially DE10162870. Alexander Cherkasky Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com Forwarded message --------- From: RKI-Info Date: Thursday, March 12, 2020 at 12:22 pm Subject: AW: ]Alexander Cherkasky To: alexcherkasky@googlemail. com Dear Madam, Dear Sir, Thank you for your inquiry. For security reasons, we cannot open email attachments and external links. In addition, we cannot comment on external sources for capacity reasons. Information on the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is available on the RKI's website at www.rki.de/covid-19, including the RKI's risk assessment and answers to frequently asked questions (FAQ). This information can change at short notice due to new findings. The RKI is continuously monitoring what is happening and is in contact with the WHO. Thank you for your understanding and best regards from the Robert Koch Institute. _________________________________________________________________________ The Robert Koch Institute is a federal institute within the portfolio of the Federal Ministry of Health ------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------- ---------- From: Alexander Cherkasky [mailto:alexcherkasky@googlemail.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2020 4:09 p.m. To: President_RKI Subject: [RKI spam suspicion]Alexander Cherkasky Dear Professor Dr Lothar H. Wieler, you probably know my name, Alexander Cherkasky. I am a biologist and inventor, referred to in the press as the "Second Einstein" and I am writing to you because I would like to present and propose a program to you, namely the new program comprising the optimal biological and organizational solutions for the fight against the corona viruses, HIV, other viruses and other diseases. The biological solutions consist of my inventions for fighting viruses inside and outside the cells and consist of my inventions of the optimal test systems and rapid diagnostic systems. The optimal organizational solution is my suggestion of jointly founding the globally unique institute for open discussion, evaluation and implementation of (preferably biomedical) inventions (as solutions to problems) regardless of the inventor's status. Stern, Bild der Wissenschaft, Laborjournal, Neue Rhein Zeitung, Westdeutsche Zeitung and Rheinsche Post, among others, reported about me and my inventions. The following links to the articles about me and my blog will certainly be of interest to you: http://www.nrz.de/staedte/duesseldorf/erfinder-klagt-die-pharma-industrie-an-id7767418.html http://www.laborjournal.de/epaper/LJ_16_11.pdf http://www. laborjournal.de/epaper/LJ_16_11.pdf (pages 54-58) http://alexandercherkaskyantiviral.blogspot.de/ The following list is the list of credits, of the recognition for my inventions. These are the companies and research institutions from 11 countries that took my patent documents as a basis, experimentally checked them, confirmed them and named them. These namings were made both by the responsible examiners at the respective patent offices, mainly at the US Patent and Trademark Office (The United States Patent and Trademark Office, USPTO), and by inventors and applicants themselves. You don't need to be a specialist to see them check the following list for accuracy. All you have to do is google the respective patent document numbers on the Internet, either in Google Patents or in the USPTO Patent Literature Database. Here is the portial list: 1. My published patent document WO2006/136892 was referenced in the patent documents EP2447277 and WO2012055985 (for anti-HIV vaccines) of the Spanish company Laboratorios del Dr. Esteve and the research organization Fundacio Privada Institut de Reserca de la SIDA-Caixa 2. My patent document DE19925052 (against HIV, Corona and other viruses, i.e. in order to combat viruses in cells, either in infected cells or cells, that could be infected), was mentioned in the US Patent US9260471 of the American company Sirna Therapeutics (now part of Merck) 3. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9181551 of Sirna Therapeutics (Cambridge, MA) 4. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10351852 of Sirna Therapeutics 5. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10662428 of Sirna Therapeutics 6. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10889815 of Sirna Therapeutics 7. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9970005 of Sirna Therapeutics 8. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9771588 of Sirna Therapeutics 9. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9657294 of Sirna Therapeutics 10. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9994853 of Sirna Therapeutics 11. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10000754 of Sirna Therapeutics 12. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US10508277 of Sirna Therapeutics 13. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9732344 of Leonid Beigelman (at Sirna Therapeutics) 14. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9738899 of Leonid Beigelman 15. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US9957517 of Leonid Beigelman 16. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7999073 of the Swiss company Lonza 17. DE19925052 mentioned in the US Patent US7320859 of the German firm Amaxa sold to Lonza 18. DE19937512 was mentioned in the US Patent US7163658 (for sequencing of nucleic acid sequences) of the American inventor Rouvain Bension 19. DE19937512 mentioned in the US Patent US8153438 of Halcyon Molecular 20. DE19937512 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia 21. DE19929530 mentioned in the German Patent document DE102019119782 of Rheinisch-Westfälische Technische Hochschule (RWTH) Aachen, North Rhine Westfalia 22. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7557182 of the Canadian firm Angiochem 23. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US7902156 of Angiochem 24. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9713646 of Angiochem 25. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9914754 of Angiochem 26. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8710013 of Angiochem 27. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828925 of Angiochem 28. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8828949 of Angiochem 29. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8853353 of Angiochem 30. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8921314 of Angiochem 31. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US8969310 of Angiochem 32. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9161988 of Angiochem 33. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9173891 of Angiochem 34. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9365634 of Angiochem 35. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9221867 of Angiochem 36. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US10980892 of Angiochem 37. DE19953696 mentioned in the US Patent US9976133 of Michael Heller at the University of California 38. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8034766 of the American company E I du Pont de Nemours and Company and University College London 39. DE19822406 mentioned in the US Patent US8431526 of E I du Pont de Nemours and Company 40. US20080242565 mentioned in the US Patent US8273694 of Yutomi, Inc., and of Americans Jeffrey Brown, Joseph Duimstra and Jason Wells 41. DE10160248 (especially for the Fc-AChR fusion proteins against the autoimmune disease Myasthenia gravis) was mentioned in the US Patent US9243071 of the Japanese company Nihon Pharmaceutical 42. DE10162870 mentioned in the US Patent US8679500 of the Institute National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM) (Paris), Universite de Bretagne Occidentale (Brest, FR) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) (Paris) 43. DE10162867 mentioned in the US Patent US8772254 of Devgen N.V. in Belgium 44. US20070106066 (for anti-cancer fusion proteins) mentioned in the US Patent US10591486 of Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (Inserm) and Universite D'Evry-Val D'Essone (in France) 45. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US9493543 of the big Danish company Novo Nordisk. 46. US20070106066 mentioned in the US Patent US10766924 of the Japanese company JSR Corporation The proposed Institute for open discussion, open evaluation and implementation of inventions, regardless of the inventor's status, can first set up an Internet platform that brings together the state problem-solving institutions, inventors as problem solvers with their inventions, as well as entrepreneurs, investors, biotechnological service companies and patients, brought together so that they learn about each other and communicate with each other, can network. There are also opportunities for open discussion and open evaluation of the proposed inventions for all interested parties. In this way, solutions can also be found and implemented or realized for optimal climate protection. When it comes to therapies, it is about the best organizational solution, the best structure that can exist for the optimal implementation of inventions and for the optimal development, unfolding of personal potential. There is also the possibility that new therapies will be tested as part of the so-called compassionate use. A new additional, productive, effective and dynamic problem solving and value chain is proposed. I ask you to contact and support me. Sincerely, Alexander Cherkasky Dipl.-Biol. Alexander Cherkasky Prinz-Georg-Str. 5 40477 Düsseldorf Tel: 0211 482179 Email: alexcherkasky@googlemail.com