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

Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Sponsored by CAS
CAS provides practical pointers on how intellectual property and R&D teams can work in tandem to unlock tangible benefits and avoid wasted spend
Sponsored by CAS
CAS explores how AI is transforming intellectual property, from inventorship and copyright disputes to new demands on patent attorneys
Sponsored by That.Legal
Gillian Tan of That.Legal discusses a recent decision by the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and what it reveals about the evidential burden in bad-faith trademark claims
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
A team from Cooley shares how they overturned a massive damages award by emphasising that the opposing company’s trade secrets claims were time-barred
Sponsored by Licks Attorneys
Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Laís Souza of Licks Attorneys explain how the provision operates in practice, highlighting evidential hurdles and best practices for patent applicants
Sponsored by Liu, Shen & Associates
Chunyu Cui and Ziqing Wu of Liu, Shen & Associates say recent trends in China’s intellectual property courts indicate alignment with international standards and send a clear signal to the global market
Gift this article