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

The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
The firm was rebuilding its IP practice through a string of patent hires and a Texas expansion, but its dissolution has put the newly built talent back into the market
Gift this article