[1] The parents provided their children's tissue for research on the disease and the non-profit groups aided in the identification of other affected families.

[1] The defendant was Reuben Matalon, who received these tissue samples and used them to isolate and patent the Canavan gene sequence.

[1] The court dismissed the plaintiffs' claims that the defendants did not provide informed consent, conducted a breach of fiduciary duties, concealed the patent, and misappropriated trade secrets.

[1] The court did uphold the plaintiffs' claim of unjust enrichment at the expense of the donors of tissue, writing that "the facts paint a picture of a continuing research collaboration that involved plaintiffs also investing time and significant resources.

"[1] The case set a precedent for determining ownership of donated tissue samples.