US politician calls for mandatory licensing on Myriad’s cancer tests

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

US politician calls for mandatory licensing on Myriad’s cancer tests

A senior politician has called for the US government to force genetics company Myriad to license its patents to ensure greater public access to testing for breast and ovarian cancer

Senator Patrick Leahy sent a letter on Friday to Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, urging him to use “march-in rights” under the Bayh-Dole Act on Myriad’s patents covering the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which can be used to screen for certain types of cancer.

The move comes after the Supreme Court’s mixed ruling in June in Association for Molecular Pathology v Myriad Genetics. The Court ruled that isolated and purified DNA is a naturally occurring phenomenon and therefore ineligible for patent protection, but synthetically created complementary DNA (cDNA) is eligible for patent protection.

In his letter, Leahy argued that Myriad’s patents were partially based on research funded by the US government. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, other companies were unable to offer the tests because of Myriad’s patent. Myriad charges between $3,000 and $4,000 for the tests.

Since the Supreme Court’s decision, several competitors have begun to offer the tests. Myriad has sued two of these rivals, Ambry Genetics and Gene by Gene, arguing that they infringe other Myriad patents not invalidated by the Court.

The Bayh-Dole Act allows private companies to claim the rights to inventions created with federal funds, generally without reimbursing the government, but grants the government “march-in rights” to require the patent holder to grant a licence on reasonable terms. If the patent holder refuses, the government can directly license the patent in certain circumstances.

“The health benefits of genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer are clear,” wrote Leahy. “The healthcare cost savings are also clear.

“I am concerned, however, that the health needs of the public are not reasonably satisfied by the patentee in this situation because the testimony presented to the USPTO made clear that many women are not able to afford the testing provided by Myriad.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers at A&O Shearman analyse developments regarding UPC’s long-arm jurisdiction, including its scope and jurisdictional limits
Michelle Lee discusses reaching milestones at the USPTO, AI’s role in legal work, and how to empower women in tech and IP
Executive chair Matt Dixon, who reveals a new associate hire, says the firm wants to offer a realistic pathway to partnership while avoiding the ‘corporate machine’ route
Mayer Brown’s role in cardiovascular technology dispute reflects how firms are pursuing precedent-setting cases to try and guide AI and patent law
Kevin Mack, Via’s new president, emphasises the importance of collaborative licensing structures and shares how AI tools can help create new lines of business
A Tokyo District Court ruling concerning movie spoilers, and a second chance for VLSI against Intel were also among the top talking points
Practitioners believe new AI tools at the USPTO will not replace lawyers or disrupt revenue, but instead expose where a trademark attorney’s value lies
Leighton Cassidy Legal hopes to leverage its founder's international experience and provide clients with a rare chance to receive litigation and prosecution under one umbrella
UKIPO rejects trademark application for 'Cristiano Ronaldo Origins' following opposition by Beck Greener client in a rare case that considered actual use
Partners at both firms have voted in favour of the tie-up, which marks ‘the largest law firm merger in history’
Gift this article