For those following Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario’s challenge to the validity of certain gene patents in the Federal Court (T-2249-14 – see earlier post), CHEO has announced a settlement: “the patent holder Transgenomic has agreed to provide CHEO and all other Canadian public sector hospitals and laboratories the right to test Canadians for Long QT syndrome on a not-for-profit basis”.
Australia’s highest court has issued its decision in D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc, allowing the appeal and holding that claims directed to the BRCA1 gene be revoked on the basis that the substance of the claim “is information embodied in arrangements of nucleotides” and not a “manner of manufacture.” Continue reading Australian Myriad
On Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu LLC that the claims to a method of distributing copyrighted media over the Internet were directed to unpatentable subject matter . The U.S. Supreme Court had previously remanded the proceeding back to the CAFC after Myriad and again after Alice when, in both previous cases, the court had found the claims patentable. Continue reading Third Round
As indicated below, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) has started litigation against the University of Utah Research Foundation, Genzyme Genetics and Yale University. The litigation seeks a declaration of non-infringement and invalidity of certain patents relating to Long QT Syndrome genes, including on the basis of non-patentable subject matter. Continue reading Gene Patents
The United States Supreme Court affirmed the en banc CAFC decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l that the claims were directed to a patent-ineligible abstract idea.
The United States Supreme Court has decided to hear the appeal in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al. on the issue of whether computer-implemented inventions are patentable subject matter. This is an appeal from an en banc decision of the CAFC in which the panel of ten judges had written seven separate decisions with a majority holding the claims to be non-patentable.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that isolated DNA is not patentable subject matter but cDNA is patentable in Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al.
Earlier today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit released its en banc decision in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation on the patentability of computer related inventions. The panel of ten judges wrote seven sets of reasons but a majority affirmed the lower court decision that the asserted system, method and computer-readable media claims were not directed to eligible subject matter.
CIPO has issued practice guidance to patent examiners on patentable subject matter (PN2013-02) and the examination of computer-implemented inventions (PN2013-03) following the November 2011 decision in Canada (Attorney General) v. Amazon.com Inc. 2011 FCA 328.
This afternoon, the United States Supreme Court announced that it will hear the appeal in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics on a single question: “Are human genes patentable?”