The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 ruling in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics changed the landscape of what is considered patentable material in the context of genetic inventions. In the five years since Myriad, companies have pushed the boundaries of patenting certain types of genetic materials. Despite Myriad’s express statement that it was not considering “the patentability of DNA in which the order of the naturally occurring nucleotides has been altered,” the courts have not yet established the contours of how much nucleotide sequences need to be altered in order to “create something new” in order to be patentable. However, as we discuss in the next section, we expect the Court to address these questions as biotechnology companies increasingly invest resources into emerging, expensive technologies involving genes and seek to protect their investments through patents.
The post Post-Myriad Legal and Policy Considerations for Patenting Genetic Inventions appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law.
Post-Myriad Legal and Policy Considerations for Patenting Genetic Inventions
No Comments
Business
- Patents on Transactions Using Cryptocurrency: Square versus PayPal
- Managing the Perils of Public IP Company Ownership
- IPO Top 300, 2020: Slight Decreases in Patent Grants Due to Budgets, Not COVID
- Pardon Me? Levandowski Case Highlights Need for Proactive Approach to Avoid Trade Secret Problems in Hiring
- How Patents Enable Mavericks and Challenge Incumbents
Recent Posts
- Justices Lean Toward Limiting, Not Eliminating, Assignor Estoppel Doctrine in Minerva v. Hologic
- Kappos at PTAB Masters Day 2: PTAB Problems Arose When It Failed to Evolve
- EPO Opposition Division Upholds NuCana Patent on Gilead’s Sovaldi, Highlighting Potential Flaws of CAFC Ruling in Gilead/Idenix
- Countries Like the Philippines are Unable to Utilize IP Flexibilities to Fight COVID-19
- Why the Patent Classification System Needs an Update