Myriad, SCOTUS | JD Supra

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 9/14/2023

In those (in retrospect) halcyon days more than a decade ago (before Mayo, Myriad, Alice, and the subject matter eligibility quagmire arose), perhaps the most significant Supreme Court decision was KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex...more

Federal Circuit Weighs In On Patent Eligibility Of Isolated Vitamin

Foley & Lardner LLP on 2/23/2023

It has been a while since the Federal Circuit weighed in on the patent eligibility of so-called “natural product” claims. While the finding of non-eligibility in ChromaDex, Inc. v. Elysium Health, Inc. is not surprising, it...more

Justice Barrett to Bring Clarity to Patent Eligibility Law?

Fenwick & West LLP on 2/26/2021

Each time the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed patent eligibility, the law surrounding what can and cannot be patented has become murkier. Most recently, the wake of the Supreme Court’s Alice ruling has led to irreconcilable...more

A Step-by-Step Approach to Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Reform

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 2/19/2020

There is a belief in some quarters that the most significant barrier to patent subject matter eligibility reform is an implacable opposition by companies in the high tech sector because those companies are convinced that the...more

Patent Eligibility for “Natural” Food and Beverage Ingredients and Products

King & Spalding on 8/29/2018

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013), there has been considerable uncertainty regarding what constitutes patentable subject matter. In a...more

Sections 101 and 112: Eligibility, Patentability, or Somewhere in Between?

Womble Bond Dickinson on 3/24/2017

We wrote earlier about the Supreme Court’s renewed interest in patent eligibility and seemingly unintended confusion between the patent eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the remaining patentability requirements...more

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

JD Supra Perspectives on 10/19/2015

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

Australian High Court Rules Gene Patents Unpatentable

BakerHostetler on 10/14/2015

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

News from Abroad: Australian High Court Has Ruled in Myriad Gene Patent Case

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 10/9/2015

The Australian High Court yesterday unanimously overturned six lower court judges and dismissed some very careful reasoning to not only follow the U.S. Supreme Court in invalidating claims to the BRCA1 and 2 gene sequences,...more

News from Abroad: High Court Rules Myriad's BRCA Genes Not Patentable Subject Matter in Australia

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 10/9/2015

Just over one year after the Full Federal Court of Australia unanimously upheld an earlier Federal Court decision that naturally occurring nucleic acid molecules are patentable in Australia, the High Court of Australia has...more

Australia High Court Rules Against Gene Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on 10/9/2015

Colleagues in Australia have been spreading the bad news: The High Court of Australia followed the lead (?) of the U.S. Supreme Court and determined that Myriad cannot patent the isolated BRCA1 gene in Australia. Thanks to...more

Strong Support for Sequenom’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on 9/10/2015

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

Protecting Diagnostic Innovation – Two Actor Infringement Liability

Foley & Lardner LLP on 8/25/2015

In Akamai Techs. Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., (August 13, 2015 Fed. Cir.) an en banc Federal Circuit unanimously held that direct infringement under Section 271(a) can occur...more

Sequenom Seeks Rehearing En Banc

Foley & Lardner LLP on 8/18/2015

Sequenom, Inc. has filed a petition for rehearing en banc of the Federal Circuit decision that held its diagnostic method claims invalid under 35 USC § 101. (You can read my synopsis of that decision here). Stakeholders in...more

Myriad Throws in the Towel

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 1/28/2015

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?

Foley & Lardner LLP on 1/22/2015

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

Guest Post: Myriad -- A Direct and Unexceptional Approach

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 10/13/2014

Is there a chain of reasoning that leads to the outcome in Myriad more shortly and directly than that outlined by Justice Thomas and without invoking judicial exceptions? It is strongly arguable that this is indeed the case...more

The USPTO Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance TRIPS Over Treaty Requirements

Foley & Lardner LLP on 7/30/2014

The “Myriad-Mayo” patent subject matter eligibility guidance issued March 4, 2014 reflects the USPTO’s interpretation of Supreme Court cases interpreting and applying 35 USC § 101 to claims involving laws of nature, natural...more

Why Are Method of Treatment Claims and Method of Manufacture Claims Subject to Scrutiny Under the USPTO Patent Subject Matter...

Foley & Lardner LLP on 7/16/2014

The USPTO has asked for written comments on its patent subject matter eligibility guidance by July 31, 2014. In this article, I discuss why therapeutic method claims and method of manufacture claims should not be subject to...more

Myriad › Supreme Court of the United States