US Supreme Court to clarify patent eligibility of genes

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

Cookies Settings

US Supreme Court to clarify patent eligibility of genes

The Supreme Court of the United States agreed on Friday to hear the Myriad case, which could provide much-needed clarification on the patent eligibility of genes

The lawsuit, The Association for Molecular Pathology v Myriad Genetics, concerns biotech company Myriad's patent claims relating to isolated DNA of the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes, which can help doctors evaluate a patient's risk of breast cancer and ovarian cancer.

Myriad's claims also cover all possible mutations of the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes and the test for the mutations. At present, scientists cannot perform this test without permission from Myriad.

The Supreme Court will reconsider a previous finding by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which concluded that Myriad's composition of matter claims on the genes can be patented under Section 101.

The Federal Circuit initially decided the case in July 2011, overturning a previous district court ruling which found that Myriad's claims relating to isolated DNA molecules concern patent-ineligible products of nature. It also reversed the district court's conclusion that Myriad's method claim for analysing changes in the growth rates of transformed cells to test for possible cancer therapeutics is a scientific principle, and thus cannot be patented.

However, the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court's conclusion that Myriad's method claims for comparing DNA sequences are patent-ineligible "abstract, mental steps".

The plaintiffs later appealed to the Supreme Court, but the case was returned to the Federal Circuit in March this year following the Supreme Court's decision in Mayo v Prometheus.

Despite the Mayo v Prometheus decision, the Federal Circuit once again ruled in favour of Myriad in August. In September, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a petition asking the Supreme Court, for the second time, to reconsider the case. The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the matter by the end of 2013.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
The chief technology officer remit, which has been created as the firm is building its litigation team, will include expanding the use of AI in patent and legal work and automating manual processes
Former Hoyng Rokh Moneiger partner Laura Alonso, who brought her team to ECIJA in March, discusses plans to expand further and why ECIJA’s ‘IP DNA’ is helping broaden her work
Amita Haylock discusses building an integrated Asia practice as clients increasingly demand that firms combine IP, technology and data expertise
Gift this article