User:Yushan717/draft
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics No. 11-725 was a case challenging the eligibility of gene patents in the United States, specifically challenging patents on cancer genes held by Myriad Genetics. Prior to this case, the US Patent Office accepted patents on isolated DNA sequences as a composition of matter. This case was originally heard in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, which ruled that these claims were not patent eligible as genes are products of nature. Myriad Genetics then appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Circuit court overturned the previous decision, ruling that isolated DNA which does not exist alone in nature can be patented. Proponents of the validity of these patents argue that they incentivize investment in biotechnology and promote innovation in genetic research by not keeping technology shrouded in secrecy. Opponents argued that these patents stifle innovation by preventing others from conducting cancer research, limit options for cancer patients in seeking genetic testing, and are not valid because they claim to patent genetic information that is intrinsic to all humans.
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad | |
---|---|
Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit |
Full case name | The Association for Molecular Pathology, The American College of Medical Genetics, The American Society for Clinical Pathology, The College of American Pathologists, Haig Kazazian, MD, Arupa Ganguly, PhD, Wendy Chung, MD, PhD, Harry Ostrer, MD, David Ledbetter, PhD, Stephen Warren, PhD, Ellen Matloff, M.S., Elsa Reich, M.S., Breast Cancer Action, Boston Women's Health Book Collective, Lisbeth Ceriani, Runi Limary, Genae Girard, Patrice Fortune, Vicky Thomason, and Kathleen Raker, v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, and Myriad Genetics, Inc., Lorris Betz, Roger Boyer, Jack Brittain, Arnold B. Combe, Raymond Gesteland, James U. Jensen, John Kendall Morris, Thomas Parks, David W. Pershing, and Michael K. Young, in their official capacity as directors for The University of Utah Research Foundation. |
Decided | August 16 2012 |
Citations | Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus, Inc. |
Case history | |
Prior history | Association for Molecular Pathology v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office |
Holding | |
Myriad's patents for isolated DNA sequences are patent eligible. | |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Lourie, Bryson, and Moore |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Lourie |
Concurrence | Moore, in part Bryson |
Dissent | in part Bryson |
Laws applied | |
§101 of Title 35 of the United States Code |