ACLU files brief in Myriad case

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

ACLU files brief in Myriad case

The ACLU and PubPat have filed their brief urging the Supreme Court to reverse the Federal Circuit’s decision upholding Myriad Genetics' gene patents

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) in their brief on behalf of The Association for Molecular Pathology yesterday asked the court to overturn an August 2012 decision by the Federal Circuit. That ruling for the second time upheld Myriad’s patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, which can be used to evaluate the risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

The case was decided by the Federal Circuit in July 2011, and a petition was subsequently granted by the Supreme Court and then put on hold pending the outcome of the Court’s ruling on Mayo v Prometheus. In March, the Supreme Court found the diagnostic method patents owned by Prometheus invalid. The Myriad case was subsequently returned to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed its original decision.

In their brief, the ACLU and PUBPAT argued that Myriad’s patents should be invalidated because genes are laws of nature, and therefore ineligible for patent protection under Section 101.

The brief noted that Myriad defends its claims on the grounds that a gene becomes a human invention when isolated, or removed, from the human body.

“Under this rationale, a kidney ‘isolated’ from the body would be patentable, gold ‘isolated’ from a stream would be patentable, and leaves ‘isolated’ from trees would be patentable,” it said.

The brief also claimed that Myriad has given women inaccurate test results, while its patents prevent other laboratories from testing genes to verify the accuracy of Myriad’s data. The petitioners argued that, although not enforced by Myriad, the patents have had a “proven chilling effect on research” relating to the genes.

The ACLU is being represented by Christopher Hansen, Sandra Park, Steven Shapiro, Aden Fine and Lenora Lapidus. PUBPAT is being represented by Daniel Ravicher and Sabrina Hassan.

Myriad is being represented by a team led by Gregory Castanias, Brian Poissant and Laura Coruzzi of Jones Day.

The case should be argued before the Supreme Court in March or April and a decision is expected before June, which marks the end of the court’s term.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Sheppard has added quantum and robotics expertise to its AI industry team to help clients navigate questions around inventorship and IP infringement
The 2026 Americas ceremony recognised outstanding firms and practitioners, along with highlighting impact cases of the year
A development concerning Stephen Thaler’s AI copyright application in India and an integration between IPH group firms were also among the top talking points
As concerns around the little-known litigation tool increase, practitioners say they are educating their clients on how it can be most effective
Kilburn & Strode and Mewburn Ellis are just two firms that have invested heavily in office space – a sign that the legal industry is serious about in-person working
In major recent developments, Dyson snagged another win against Hong Kong-based competitor Dreame and a new AI-powered UPC platform was launched
Mohit and Sidhant Goel decided not to pursue an interim injunction application so that their client, Communications Components Antenna, could benefit from a fast-track trial
Anita Cade, head of Ashurst’s IP and media team in Australia, discusses why law firms that can pull together capability across different practice areas and jurisdictions stand to gain
INTA’s CEO says London-based firms have registered fewer delegates compared to past meetings in San Diego and Atlanta, and questions the 'ethics' of trying to participate without registering
Lobbies and interest groups are among the interveners in a major dispute over whether courts can set patent pool rates
Gift this article