In a decision that is not very surprising but nonetheless worth taking note of, the Federal Circuit found that a reasonable jury could have found claims reciting methods using a recombinant polypeptide to be anticipated by...more
In Illumina, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., a divided panel of the Federal Circuit found claims directed to methods of preparing DNA samples for analysis satisfy the patent eligibility requirement of 35 USC § 101. Although...more
On Friday I will be speaking at the AUTM Eastern Regional Meeting, on a panel discussing patent eligibility issues for life sciences inventions. My topic relates to what the USPTO refers to as “nature-based products,” but...more
In Genetic Veterinary Sciences, Inc. v. Laboklin GMBH & Co., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court decision that held claims directed to methods for genotyping a Labrador Retriever invalid under 35 USC § 101 at the...more
8/13/2019
/ Alice Corporation ,
Diagnostic Method ,
DNA ,
Dogs ,
Due Process ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
FISA ,
Genetic Materials ,
Genetic Testing ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Section 101
In a decision underscoring that the U.S. stands (nearly) alone in holding most diagnostic methods to be not eligible for patenting, the Federal Court of Australia upheld Sequenom’s Australian patent directed to prenatal...more
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
4/12/2016
/ Biotechnology ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Diagnostic Method ,
DNA ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Genetic Technologies Ltd. ,
Machine-or-Transformation Test ,
Mayo v. Prometheus ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
SCOTUS
While Sequenom’s appeal of the district court’s summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent 6,258,540 under 35 USC § 101 has been pending at the Federal Circuit, the USPTO has been considering the validity of the patent...more
Although Sequenom has settled its dispute over U.S. Patent 6,258,540 with some parties, its case against Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. remains active. Thus, we all should be waiting with bated breath to see whether the Federal...more
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
In a case styled as In re BRCA1- and BRCA2-Based Hereditary Cancer Test Patent Litigation (also known as Myriad v. Ambry), the Federal Circuit held four of Myriad’s “primer” claims and two of Myriad’s detection method claims...more
On October 6, 2014, the Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in a case involving the claims of the Myriad gene patents that were not invalidated by the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision. The Federal Circuit is reviewing the...more
The Full Federal Court of Australia affirmed that isolated nucleic acids, i.e. whether it be DNA or RNA, are patentable subject matter in Australia. While an appeal to the High Court of Australia may be possible, absent an...more
One advantage of being a blogger in the relatively small world of patents is that I have gotten to know practitioners in other countries who also have a keen interest in patent law. One such person is Australian Registered...more
In Institut Pasteur v. Focarino, the Federal Circuit found that the obviousness determination by the USPTO Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences was not supported by substantial evidence, and rested on an “erroneous...more
In Sanofi-Aventis v. Pfizer, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO’s determination that Pfizer had proven an earlier date of invention of the DNA sequence at issue, even though it did not have the full, correct...more
The hearing on Myriad’s motion for a preliminary injunction against Ambry Genetics is scheduled for September 11, 2013, before Judge Robert A. Shelby at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Utah....more
9/9/2013
/ AMP v Myriad ,
DNA ,
Genetic Materials ,
Human Genes ,
Injunctions ,
Myriad ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
SCOTUS
In Aria Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s decision denying Sequenom’s motion for a preliminary injunction relating to a patent covering the non-invasive...more
One of the most interesting arguments that Myriad made in its Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief in its infringement action against Ambry Genetics Corporation relates to the database of genetic information that Myriad...more
On June 13, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in the “ACLU/Myriad” gene patenting case (formally, Association For Molecular Pathology. et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., et al., Supreme Court No....more
In the wake of the Supreme Court oral arguments in the Myriad “gene patent” case, most commentators are predicting that the Court will uphold the patent-eligibility of non-naturally occurring DNA sequences (such as cDNA), but...more