DNA Supreme Court of the United States

News & Analysis as of

Biotech Industry Supports Cert in Sequenom to Avert “Crisis of Patent Law and Medical Innovation”

The biotechnology and life sciences community has voiced broad support for Sequenom’s recent request that the Supreme Court review the Federal Circuit’s decision holding Sequenom’s diagnostic fetal DNA patent ineligible under...more

Sequenom v. Ariosa Diagnostics: A Supreme Court Petition that Requests Clarification on the Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic...

UUnder the Patent Act, one can patent “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof.” Common exceptions to what can be patented include laws of nature,...more

Supreme Court Asked to Clarify Limits on Diagnostic Method Patents

Arguing that the current state of the law weakens the patent system and poses a danger to life science innovators, biotechnology company, Sequenom, Inc., has filed a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the...more

Can Science be Copyrighted? You Might be Surprised…

Biotechnology. For many, the mere mention of the word stirs up a thought of people in white lab coats working in underground bunkers trying to create superhuman mutant weapons, with beakers of green goo bubbling in the...more

Another Diagnostic Patent Falls Under 101

In Genetic Techs Ltd v Merial LLC (Fed. Cir., April 8, 2016), the Federal Circuit invalidated yet another diagnostic patent for failing to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 101 on the ground that the claims recite nothing more than a law...more

Methods Exploiting Junk DNA May Be Useful But Lack Patent Eligibility

Striking another blow against patent eligibility in the field of biotechnology, the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that methods that use “junk DNA” to detect genetic variations lack patent eligibility under 35...more

Discoveries Are Not Patentable.

In Genetic Technologies Limited v. Merial LLC. [2015-1202, -1203] (April 8, 2016) the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court dismissal for failure to state a claim and entry of final judgment that claims 1–25 and 33–36...more

Supreme Court Corner: Q1 2016

CASES TO WATCH IN 2016 Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp PATENT – Cert. PENDING Issue: Whether the Federal Circuit erred in holding that a single entity can “actively induce” itself to infringe a patent...more

Superman Breyer v. Batman Lourie Battle in the Sequenom Petition for Cert.

Since this is an amplification of my last post on the Sequenom petition for cert. in Sequenom v. Ariosa, please go back at read my first post on the petition. I have been arguing for some years that the patent world will...more

Eligibility of Isolated Nucleic Acid: Australian and U.S. Standards

This is the second of a two-part series comparing Australian and U.S. law and will focus on patent eligibility of an isolated nucleic acid sequence. Are the patent eligibility standards for isolated nucleic acid...more

Natera Responds to Sequenom's Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Last week, Appellee Natera, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August (see "Sequenom Requests Rehearing En...more

Ariosa Diagnostics Responds to Sequenom's Petition for Rehearing En Banc

On Monday, Appellee Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. filed its response to the petition for rehearing en banc filed by Appellants Sequenom, Inc. and Sequenom Center for Molecular Medicine, LLC in August. In its response, Ariosa...more

Australian Patent Office Proposes “Coding Only” Sequence Ban

Coming soon after the High Court’s “Myriad decision” in Australia, the Australian Patent Office has proposed guidelines that would effectively limit the ban on patent-eligibility of DNA sequences to nucleic acids that code...more

Can a natural product still be patented in Australia?

Yes. While various commentaries have suggested that patentable subject matter will be restricted in Australia under the recent High Court Myriad decision to exclude naturally occurring products (whether or not isolated), my...more

Can we patent products found in nature? It's complicated. An update on Australia's Myriad decision...

It remains to be seen if this new Myriad decision in Australia will be extended as it was in the U.S. to prevent virtually any product found in nature from being patented....more

What did the Australian High Court actually say about the patent eligibility of cDNA?

As the dust from the impact of the Australian Myriad decision begins to settle, now is the time to revisit what many have said regarding patent eligibility of cDNA, against what the final appeal Court actually said. On...more

“Does a nucleic acid constitute patent eligible subject matter under Australia law?”

That is the question that we hoped Australia’s final appeal Court to have answered in the Myriad decision that it handed down last week. Some observers have been quite forthright on the point: ‘Yes, the High Court of...more

Australian High Court Rules Gene Patents Unpatentable

Like the United States Supreme Court, the High Court of Australia has determined that Myriad’s patents directed to purified and isolated DNA molecules encoding the BRCA genes are unpatentable. Indeed, the Australian Court...more

PTO Releases Report on Confirmatory Genetic Diagnostic Testing

More than three years after the June 15, 2012 deadline for providing it, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued its report on so-called "second opinion" genetic diagnostic testing, mandated by Section 27 of the...more

Strong Support for Sequenom’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc

In Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. v. Sequenom Inc., 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015), a Federal Circuit panel held that Sequenom Inc.’s prenatal diagnosis patent claims patent ineligible subject matter under the two-step test of Mayo...more

Fetal DNA Test Cannot Give Birth to a Patent - Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., et al. v. Sequenom Inc., et al.

Addressing the issue of patent eligibility of a pre-natal testing invention, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s judgement of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101 with...more

Federal Circuit Holds Medical Diagnostic Method Patent Invalid as Claiming Ineligible Subject Matter

Background - In two recent cases, Mayo v. Prometheus and Alice v. CLS Bank, the Supreme Court established a two-part test for determining eligibility for patenting. In step one, the court asks whether the claim is...more

Myriad Throws in the Towel

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision in AMP v. Myriad Genetics in 2013, Myriad (paradoxically to those either not paying attention or who over interpreted the scope of the Court's holding in its opinion) filed...more

Can Any DNA Claims Still Be Patented?

In a decision issued December 17, 2014, in In Re BRCA1- And BRCA2-Based Hereditary Cancer Test Patent Litigation (Myriad II), the Federal Circuit invalidated Myriad’s primer claims and detection method claims under 35 USC §...more

Natural Products Whiplash

What you need to know: Two important developments in the last week have exacerbated confusion around patent protection for natural products and technologies that implicate laws of nature, calling into question the...more

111 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×