Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 204: Accelerating Life Sciences Startups with James Chappell of SCbio
Episode 185: America’s Bioeconomy with Sarah Glaven, White House Research Biologist
Episode 183: Site Development for Life Sciences Companies with Adam Bruns of Site Selection Magazine
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 181: South Carolina’s Life Sciences Economy with Ashely Teasdel, Deputy Secretary of SC Department of Commerce
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 180: SCBIO and the Life Sciences Industry in South Carolina with James Chappell, SCBIO CEO
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 171: Laura Gunter, President of the NC Life Sciences Organization
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 169: Shirley Paddock, Senior VP of Clinical Development, Syneos Health
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 168: Christine Harhaj, Senior Director of Advocacy & Strategic Alliances, PhRMA
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 167: Dr. Ehsan Samei & Dr. Susan Halabi, Triangle CERSI
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 166 — Christine Vannais, COO of Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 165: Doug Edgeton, President and CEO of the North Carolina Biotechnology Center
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 164: Emily Chee, US General Manager of Novartis Gene Therapies
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 163: David Ellison, Chief Data Scientist for Lenovo’s Infrastructure Solutions Group
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 154: Andy Schwartzkopf, General Counsel and Chief Administration Officer, Signature Medical Group
Business Better Podcast Episode: Accelerating Life Sciences: How Accelerators and Education Are Joining Forces to Catapult the Life Sciences Industry
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech Episode 2
[Podcast] Keith Matthews and Chris Wozniak: Talking Ag Biotech
Podcast: Entrepreneurship in Biotech: Growing Your Business - Diagnosing Health Care
Wiley Biotech Briefings – An Advanced Course for the Regulatory Professional: TSCA and Industrial Biotechnology
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
On May 22, 2019, U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, and Representative Doug Collins (R-GA-9), Ranking Member of the...more
Clearly the High Court has given an answer to a question, but was that question the one we anticipated? That in itself is an open question!...more
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
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
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
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
The issue of patent eligibility has been a hotly litigated issue in the field of intellectual property law, and both the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court have issued numerous decisions in recent years--particularly in...more
On March 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance memorandum, entitled "Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural...more
On March 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance memorandum entitled "Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office spent the entire afternoon session of today's biotechnology/chemical/pharmaceutical (BCP) customer partnership meeting focusing on the guidance memorandum for determining the subject...more
The United States Supreme Court recently ruled that genes or other naturally-occurring pieces of DNA are patent ineligible subject matter in Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., et al. No....more
As we all know by now, the Supreme Court last month decided that isolated genes are not eligible for patenting. Although seemingly drawing a clear-cut distinction between DNA molecules having the same sequence as that which...more
The decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that isolated DNA having the same sequence as naturally-occurring DNA is not patentable subject matter is inconsistent with the position of the European Patent Office and Japanese law....more
Today the U.S. Supreme Court answered the question "Are human genes patentable?" The Court, in Association of Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al., ruled that isolated DNA is a product of nature and not...more
A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but cDNA is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring....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 a much anticipated decision, the Supreme Court issued its opinion this morning in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. In an opinion by Justice Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Roberts, Justices...more
Summary - On June 13, 2013 in a much-anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, 569 U.S. __ (2013) unanimously held that claims for isolated DNA sequences...more
Yesterday, a unanimous Supreme Court decision in Ass’n for Mol. Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., held that Myriad’s claims directed to “a naturally occurring segment of … [DNA]” are not patent eligible despite their...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its anxiously awaited decision in Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., No. 12-398 (U.S. June 13, 2013). The Court addressed whether an isolated...more
April 15 is a big day for biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and medical diagnostic companies at the Supreme Court, as justices begin a new session by hearing oral arguments in a landmark case involving the patentability of...more
The Supreme Court's grant of certiorari over the question "Are human genes patentable" had raised for many the specter of an uninformed generalist court rendering a decision containing dicta that would negatively affect...more