News & Analysis as of

Genetic Testing Supreme Court of the United States

BCLP

Quantity - Not Quality - Matters in Assessing Liability for Patent Infringement under Section 271(f)(1)

BCLP on

In Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., the Supreme Court ruled that, as a matter of law, “the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention” from the United States does not trigger liability under Section...more

Lathrop GPM

Supreme Court Limits Potential Liability for Overseas Patent Infringement

Lathrop GPM on

Sale from the U.S. to overseas destination of a single component cannot violate § 271(f) - On February 22, the Supreme Court announced its latest unanimous decision in a patent case....more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

The Supreme Court Chooses Quantity over Quality – Supplying a Single Component of a Multicomponent Invention Does Not Constitute...

On February 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention qualifies as an infringing act under 35 USC §271(f)(1) of the U.S. Patent Act. In its...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Supreme Court Limits § 271(f)(1) Overseas Infringement Reach: More than One Exported Component Required for Offshore Manufacturing...

The US Supreme Court held in Life Techs. Corp. v. Promega Corp., Slip No. 14-1538 (Feb. 22, 2017) that supplying a single component of a multi-component invention manufactured abroad does not give rise to patent infringement...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Patent Law's Reach over Extraterritorial Infringement Liability

Today, in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp.,1 the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that supply of a single component of a multicomponent invention for manufacture abroad does not give rise to liability under 35...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Three Pressing Challenges for Personalized Medicine

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Personalized medicine can be described as the science of targeted therapies. Advances in diagnostic and molecular medicine have made it possible to more precisely identify alternative treatment options for patients based on...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Sequenom Files Opening Brief in Appeal of Summary Judgment on Section 101 Grounds

Earlier this week, Sequenom, Inc. filed its opening brief in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., appealing summary judgment that its licensed claims to a genetic diagnostic method for detecting fetal diseases and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Myriad Genetics Files Infringement Suit Against Gene by Gene for Genetic Diagnostic Testing of BRCA Genes Hidden Field

A day after Myriad Genetics sued Ambry Genetics for patent infringement, the company filed suit in the District of Utah, Central Divisions against Gene by Gene Ltd. (Case No. 2:13-cv-00643-EJF; complaint). The complaint is...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Myriad Sues Ambry for Offering BRCA1/BRCA2 Breast Cancer Genetic Testing

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On July 9, 2013, Myriad Genetics, Inc. brought suit against Ambry Genetics Corporation, alleging that Ambry is infringing ten (10) patents by offering breast cancer genetic testing for the BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations...more

McAfee & Taft

McAfee & Taft tIP Sheet - June 2013: Big or small, the loss of gene patents may affect us all

McAfee & Taft on

On June 13th, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics that isolated DNA is not eligible for patent protection....more

12 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide