Robinson Bradshaw

Topic: Supreme Court

Myriad, Finally: Supreme Court Surprises by not Surprising

After what seemed like an eternity, the epic saga known as AMP v. Myriad Genetics has finally come to a close. On June 13, 2013, the Supreme Court ruled (1) that isolated genomic DNA (gDNA) is not patent-eligible under section 101 of the Patent Act, but (2) cDNA is. For once, what the Justices said […]

DNA Fingerprinting as Routine Arrest Booking Procedure Upheld as Anticipated

Jennifer K. Wagner, J.D., Ph.D., is a solo-practicing attorney in State College, PA and a research associate at the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for the Integration of Genetic Healthcare Technologies. Oral arguments in Maryland v. King were held on February 26, 2013, as reported previously here on GLR. Following oral arguments, I stated, “If forced […]

Some Thoughts on Myriad After the Supreme Court Argument

On April 15, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics. This was another significant step—probably the penultimate one—in the long-running Myriad drama. It began with a group of plaintiffs (including researchers, doctors, and breast cancer patients) joining an American Civil Liberties Union-organized lawsuit to invalidate Myriad’s patents on two […]

All Eyes on Maryland v. King: Recapping the Supreme Court Oral Argument

Seating was in short supply to hear oral arguments before the Supreme Court in what J. Alito referred to as “the most important criminal procedural case that this court has heard in decades,” Maryland v. King. Eager spectators –including this contributor for the Genomics Law Report – lined up along the marble steps of the […]

Supreme Court to Rule on Patentability of Human Genes

Robert Cook-Deegan contributed to this commentary. Dr. Cook-Deegan is a research professor in the Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy and the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University. The Supreme Court today granted a writ of certiorari (meaning they agreed to hear the appeal) in Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., et al., the […]

Myriad Updates: Clinical Data as Trade Secrets and a Pending Certiorari Decision

Earlier this month, my colleagues John Conley, Robert Cook-Deegan, James Evans and I published a policy article in the European Journal of Human Genetics (EJHG) entitled “The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets.” The EJHG article is open access so you can read the entire article at the EJHG website, but here […]

Applying Mayo to Myriad: Latest Decision Brings No New News (Plus: Why the Final Myriad Decision Might Not Matter for Personalized Medicine)

The latest chapter in the Myriad gene patent litigation was written yesterday, with the Federal Circuit issuing its much anticipated opinion (pdf) after rehearing the case following the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision earlier this year in Prometheus v. Mayo. Or perhaps we should say that the latest chapter was “rewritten” as, in a move that […]

Patenting and Personal Genomics: 23andMe Receives its First Patent, and Plenty of Questions

Earlier this week 23andMe, the Silicon Valley-based personal genomics company, was awarded its first patent: US Patent Number 8,187,811, entitled “Polymorphisms associated with Parkinson’s disease”. 23andMe co-founder Anne Wojcicki announced the issuance of the patent via a post on the company’s blog late Monday evening, attempting to strike a tenuous balance between her company’s oft-championed philosophical […]

Myriad Finally Reaches the Supreme Court (But Only For a Moment)

Yesterday, the Supreme Court (as we predicted last week that it might) GVR’d the certiorari petitions (pdf) of both parties in the Myriad Genetics case. Big news, right? Not really. What this means is that the Court Granted cert in Myriad, but for the limited purpose of Vacating the Federal Circuit’s July 2011 decision and Remanding […]

Prometheus Patents Struck Down, 9-0: Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. Analysis

In a strong rebuke to the Federal Circuit, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held (pdf), on March 20, 2012, that Prometheus Laboratories’ claims to methods of administering drugs to treat gastrointestinal autoimmune diseases do not meet the patentable subject matter standard of section 101 of the Patent Act.  The representative claim quoted by the Court recites, […]