Myriad sues competitors for infringing genes patents
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Myriad sues competitors for infringing genes patents

Myriad is suing two competitors for allegedly infringing its patents on genes that can help to detect cancer, despite a ruling by the Supreme Court that human genes are ineligible for patent protection

myriad.jpg

In Association for Molecular Pathology v Myriad Genetics last month, the court ruled that isolated and purified DNA was a product of nature, which is exempt from patent protection under Section 101. The justices ruled that complementary DNA (cDNA) can be patented, however, because it requires significant human skill to create.

The genes could be used to screen for breast and ovarian cancer, but because Myriad owns the patents on them, other companies were unable to offer the tests. Utah-based Myriad charged around $3,000 for providing testing for the two genes.

Since the ruling, companies and universities have announced they will provide the tests. Last week, Myriad sued two of these companies, Ambry Genetics and Gene by Gene, claiming their tests infringed other patents owned by Myriad that were not invalidated by the court.

In a statement, Ambry CEO Charles Dunlop said the company will “vigorously defend” the complaint and the motion for preliminary injunction. He said the company has had “an overwhelming response from our clients seeking an alternative laboratory to perform BRCA testing”.

Myriad has filed a separate complaint against Gene by Gene.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Loes van den Winkel, attorney at Arnold & Siedsma, explains why clients' enthusiasm is contagious and why her job does not mean managing fashion models
Allen & Gledhill partner Jia Yi Toh shares her experience of representing the winning team in the first-ever case filed under Singapore’s new fast-track IP dispute resolution system
In-house lawyers reveal how they balance cost, quality, and other criteria to get the most from their relationships with external counsel
Dario Pietrantonio of Robic discusses growth opportunities for the firm and shares insights from his journey to managing director
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Law firms that pay close attention to their client relationships are more likely to win repeat work, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
The EMEA research period is open until May 31
Practitioners analyse a survey on how law firms prove value to their clients and reflect on why the concept can be hard to pin down
Gift this article