Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics
| Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. | |
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued April 15, 2013 Decided June 13, 2013 |
|
| Full case name | Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., et al. |
| Docket nos. | 12-398 |
| Citations | 569 U.S. ___ (more)
133 S.Ct. 2107
|
| Prior history | The District Court for the Southern District of New York found that patents were ineligible. 702 F.Supp. 2d 181, 192–211 (SDNY 2010). On appeal, the Federal Circuit reversed the decision and found 2-1 in favor of Myriad (689 F.3d 1303). |
| Holding | |
| Naturally occurring DNA sequences, even when isolated from the body, cannot be patented, but artificially created DNA is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring. | |
| Court membership | |
|
|
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan; Scalia (all but part 1-A) |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. Article I, Section 8, Clause 8, 35 U.S.C. § 101 | |
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, No. 12-398 (569 U.S. ___ June 13, 2013), was a case challenging the validity of gene patents in the United States, specifically challenging certain claims in issued patents owned or controlled by Myriad Genetics that cover isolated DNA sequences, methods to diagnose propensity to cancer by looking for mutated DNA sequences, and methods to identify drugs using isolated DNA sequences. Prior to the case, the U.S. Patent Office accepted patents on isolated DNA sequences as a composition of matter. Diagnostic claims were already under question through the In re Bilski and Mayo v. Prometheus cases. Drug screening claims were not seriously questioned prior to this case.
The case was originally heard in Southern District Court of New York, which ruled that all the challenged claims were not patent eligible. Myriad then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Circuit court overturned the previous decision in part, ruling that isolated DNA which does not exist alone in nature can be patented and that the drug screening claims were valid, and confirmed in part, finding the diagnostic claims unpatentable. The plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court, which granted certiorari and remanded the case to the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit did not change its opinion, so on September 25, 2012, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court with respect to the second Federal Circuit Decision.
...
Wikipedia