We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 19

Personalized medicine and the gene patenting debate

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2013

The transcript for today's Supreme Court oral argument in The Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., No. 12-398 (2013) has

Federal Circuit reaffirms patent eligibility of personalized medicine and diagnostic method claims

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 17 2010

Today, in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, No. 2008-1403 (Fed. Cir. 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed that personalized medicine and medical diagnostic claims are not per se unpatentable for claiming natural phenomena

Supreme Court grants certiorari in Prometheus v. Mayo (again)

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 20 2011

On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court granted Mayo's petition for certiorari in Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, 628 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010), a case addressing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 of certain method claims relevant to personalized medicine

Gene patents and diagnostics: the economics of innovation

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 11 2012

The increasing importance of genetic markers and diagnostic tests in the drug approval process and the delivery of health care requires consideration of who will underwrite the necessary research and development, Michael Hopkins and Stuart Hogarth argue in the recent issue of Nature Biotechnology

Patenting business methods after Mayo

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 30 2012

Advances in information technology, such as high-performance computing, enables the collection, analysis and sharing of information between patients and medical providers

Amici urge reversal of “gene patenting” decision

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 29 2012

On November 30th, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court will conference and consider whether to review the patent-eligibility of isolated DNA sequences

Personalized medicine after the ACLU "gene patenting" decision

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 20 2012

The biotechnology industry, including those investing in personalized medicine, have been waiting for the Federal Circuit’s decision that answers the questions whether isolated DNA and use of the isolated material are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. 101

Are human genes patentable?

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 11 2012

As reported in my November 30th, 2012 post, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the issue “are human genes patentable?”

Patent pool simplifies development of personalized medicine

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 28 2012

One argument often cited against patenting is that multiple patents can cover one product, its preparation and use, creating a so-called “patent thicket” that must be unwound like a bowl of spaghetti before a new technology is free of potential liability

Genetic data, patents and trade secrets

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 9 2012

Patents protect proprietary information but are of limited duration