Epo Mixup Scandal Revealed

allegroman

EPO MIXUP SCANDAL REVEALED
www.lequipedescons.com (Taking the mickey out of L'Equipe)
September 10, 2005

The allegations of doping against Lance Armstrong took another bizarre turn with revelations that are an exclusive at L’Equipe des Cons (LdC).



Our reporters spoke with European Patent Office spokeswoman, Yolanda Blumenfeld, by telephone from her desk at The Hague today. She acknowledged that a patent application filed by Trek, the bicycle manufacturer, naming Lance Armstrong as a co-inventor, might have been responsible for the erroneous authorization of drug tests on 1999 test samples that were recently carried out by the French National Anti-Doping Laboratory at Chatenay-Malabry (LNDD).



Documents obtained by LdC confirm that European Patent Application No. 04100777.2 filed by the TREK BICYCLE CORP. did include Mr. Armstrong as one of the inventors.



Patent documents sent to French anti-doping lab



In a stunning revelation, the patent application was allegedly sent from EPO Offices in The Hague, Netherlands by a French patent examiner to his cousin in France to help find additional information that would refute the novelty of the invention. (LdC has been able to verify that the examiner’s relative is an employee of the French lab that conducted the tests.)



A mail clerk at the LNDD, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the EPO Patent documents containing a power of attorney with the signature of Mr. Armstrong were inadvertently placed in the testing “in” pile at the laboratory. Lab technicians then allegedly processed the patent application as an authorization to run tests on Mr. Armstrong’s 1999 Tour de France urine samples for the blood doping substance erythropoietin (EPO).



After the laboratory discovered the error, the LNDD realized it was not authorized to carry out the tests or disclose subsequent test results. Sources explain that this is why international agencies such as the International Cycling Union have been unable to receive documentation or test results relating to the scandal.



European Patent Office demands return of documents



Sources close to the case say that the European Patent Office has demanded the return of the patent application as it has not yet been published by the Office and is still considered confidential under EPO rules.



French authorities, however, are looking at the feasibility of formally disclosing the doping tests as part of the upcoming EPO publication of Mr. Armstrong’s patent application, citing their desire to make the disclosure lawful. Laboratory officials have contacted the French patent office seeking technical assistance. Ms. Blumenfeld stated however that, “Publishing doping test results as part of an examiners review of a patent application is not provided for in European or international intellectual property rules.”



A joint investigation including EPO and LNDD officials is ongoing.