Nearly five years ago the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided the controversial case of Ariosa v. Sequenom. In Sequenom the invention was a radically new method of fetal genetic testing by amplifying...more
As the readers of this blog are no doubt aware, patenting DNA defined only by a naturally occurring nucleotide sequence was banned by the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case of Association for Molecular Pathology v....more
The current U.S. Supreme Court has been noted for its hostility to patent holders in general, but the Supreme Court has been especially hostile to any sort of life sciences or software invention. The Court has attempted to...more
5/17/2016
/ Additive Manufacturing ,
Computer-Related Inventions ,
DNA ,
Food Manufacturers ,
Genetic Testing ,
Inventions ,
Life Sciences ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Software ,
USPTO ,
Vaccinations
Since the very beginning of America’s revolutionary patent system, inventors in the life sciences have been granted patents for discovering and purifying natural products. It was taken as a given that a purified natural...more
On June 13, 2013, the Supreme Court issued a decision supposedly resolving the patentability of DNA in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics. Immediately, all parties on both sides of the case declared...more