Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal Circuit Finds Claims Directed to DNA Primers and Methods of Use Unpatentable
The Federal Circuit's decision in Univ. of Utah Research Found. v. Ambry Genetics Corp., 2014-1361, -1366 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 17, 2014) is the latest in the series of Myriad cases dealing with the patentability of genetic material. The U.S. Supreme Court in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S.Ct. 2107 (2013), held that claims drawn to isolated DNA were patent-ineligible subject matter. Ambry Genetics (Ambry) began offering BRCA1 and BRCA2 diagnostic testing kits following that decision. In July 2013, Myriad Genetics, the University of Utah Research Foundation, the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, HSC Research and Development LP, and Endorecherche, Inc. (collectively “Myriad” hereinafter) sought to, inter alia , enjoin Ambry and asserted infringement of six claims (from three patents) that had not previously been considered by the Federal Circuit or the Supreme Court. The Utah District Court denied Myriad's motion for a preliminary injunction and the Federal Circuit panel, Prost, Clevenger and Dyk affirmed. Circuit Judge Dyk delivered the opinion of the court.
The four composition of matter claims on appeal are directed to primers which are short, synthetic, single-stranded DNA molecules that bind complimentary target DNA and enable synthesis of DNA having all or part of the sequence of a BRCA gene in a DNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The two method claims on appeal involve comparison of wild-type BRCA gene sequences with the patient's BRCA gene sequence. The lower court held all six claims patent ineligible as claiming naturally occurring DNA sequences and/or abstract ideas.
The Federal Circuit found no difference between the isolated DNA considered patent ineligible by the Supreme Court in Myriad and the primers at issue noting that the primers necessarily contain the identical sequence of the BRCA sequence directly opposite to the strand to which they are designed to bind.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.