News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Myriad › Mayo v. Prometheus

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

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

Womble Bond Dickinson

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

Womble Bond Dickinson on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2015: #16 to #20

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its ninth annual list of top patent stories. For 2015, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Australia High Court Rules Against Gene Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Strong Support for Sequenom’s Petition for Rehearing En Banc

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Protecting Diagnostic Innovation – Two Actor Infringement Liability

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Sequenom Seeks Rehearing En Banc

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

The USPTO Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance TRIPS Over Treaty Requirements

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

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

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Docs @ BIO: The Rest of the Story - Bloomberg BNA Hosts Panel on Subject Matter Eligibility

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Last month at the BIO convention, Randy Kubetin, Managing Editor of Bloomberg BNA's Life Sciences Law & Industry Report moderated a panel entitled "Patent Eligibility from the Trenches: Practical Implications of the Supreme...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Patent-Eligibility of Stem Cells Under New USPTO "Myriad-Mayo" Guidance

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In March, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) implemented new procedures to address whether inventions that relate in whole or in part to laws of nature and naturally occurring products are patent-eligibility in...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Thoughts on the USPTO's Patent Eligibility Guidelines (and What to Do About Them)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently issued (without public notice or opportunity to comment) its interpretation of the standards for subject matter eligibility in view of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Mayo...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

USPTO Issues Guidance for Examining Process Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On March 4th, 2014, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued “2014 Procedures For Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature/Natural Principles, Natural Phenomena, And/Or...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Do These Sequence Analysis Method Patents Satisfy Section 101?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

According to an article on Law360, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. is challenging the validity of two Genetic Technologies Ltd. patents on the basis that the claimed intron sequence analysis methods recite natural phenomena that do...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Supreme Court's Myriad Decision: Where Does It Leave the "Inventive Concept" Test?

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Perhaps one of the most intriguing issues coming out of the Supreme Court's Myriad decision is whether it leaves any room for the "inventive concept" test raised by earlier Supreme Court decisions, including Mayo v....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Again Upholds Patent-Eligibility of Myriad's Isolated DNA Claims, Holds Diagnostic “Analyzing” Claims...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On August 16, 2012, in the most recent decision in one of the most controversial and publicized biotech patent cases in many years, the Federal Circuit again decided the “ACLU/Myriad” gene patenting case (formally, The...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Myriad Oral Arguments: Deja Vu?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On Friday, July 20, 2012, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (the ACLU ”gene patenting”/BRCAI case), which is on remand in view of the Supreme Court...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Myriad Urges Dismissal of “Gene Patenting” Case

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Yesterday Myriad urged the Federal Circuit to dismiss the “gene patenting” case on the ground that subject matter jurisdiction no longer exists. Myriad argued that in the alternative, the case should be remanded to the...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Sets Briefing Deadline, Oral Argument Date For Myriad Isolated DNA Case

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s March 26, 2012 order remanding Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (the ACLU ”gene patenting”/BRCAI case), the Federal Circuit has issued an order requesting...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Supreme Court Sends Myriad Back to the Federal Circuit

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Supreme Court has issued a “GVR” in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (the ACLU ”gene patenting”/BRCAI case), granting certiorari only to vacate the Federal Circuit decision that upheld the...more

20 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide