Myriad sues competitors for infringing genes patents

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

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

After almost a quarter of a century, Marshall Gerstein has a new managing partner
Abbott winning another round against Sinocare and Menarini, and 'long arm' clarification on the UK's position within the UPC, were also among major developments
Maria Peyman, head of IP at Birketts, explains why the firm is adopting a ‘seamless approach’ for clients by integrating two of its practice areas
Matthew Swinn, who leads the firm’s IP practice, discusses why Mallesons is well-placed to remain a major IP force
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
Gift this article