Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Patenting Genomics Innovations: Post-Myriad Challenges and Possibilities

Tuhin Chatterjee

Abstract

Patenting gene and its nucleotide sequence has been a controversial subject since the release of working draft of the Human Genome Project. A number of US Supreme Court judgments pronounced in the recent past and accordingly revised patent examination strategies of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) created a huge confusion in the field of biotechnology.

The present article explores the volatile nature of judicial decision-making in modern biotechnology arena and attempts to analyze and gauge the practical impact of the landmark judgment of Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad genetics Inc. The present article also reveals how the Myriad judgment changed the USPTO’s long-standing practice of granting patents on isolated DNA molecules and set a new patent-eligibility standard for genes and DNA related innovations.

The present article also endeavors to investigate the challenges and possibilities of patenting isolated proteins, sequence homology and protein three-dimensional structure based innovations in post-Myriad US patent regime. 

Keywords

Genomics, Three dimensional (3D) structure, DNA sequence, Patent, Myriad Genetics Inc., USPTO.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Vol. 66, Federal Register. [place unknown: publisher unknown]; 2001 Jan 5 [cited 2016 Dec 5]. 1092–9 p. Available from: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/web/offices/com/sol/notices/utilexmguide.pdf.

FUNK BROS. SEED CO. v. KALO INOCULANT CO. [place, publisher, date unknown].

12-398 Association for molecular pathology v. Myriad genetics, Inc. (06/13/2013). [place unknown: publisher unknown]; 2013 [cited 2016 Dec 5]. Available from: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf.

Souza, José S. Expressed sequence tags (ESTs). [place unknown]: Humana Press; 2009. [cited 2016 Dec 5]. Available from: http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9781588297594. ISBN: 9781588297594.

Eli Lilly and Co. COMMENTS OF ELI LILLY AND COMPANY ON THE REVISED INTERIM WRITTEN DESCRIPTION GUIDELINES. USPTO. 58.

Commissioner for Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2014 Procedure For Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws Of NaturelNatural Principles, Natural Phenomena, And/Or Natural Products. MEMORANDUM: Patent Examining Corps. 2014 Mar 4 [cited 2016 Dec 5].

Strachan T, Read A. Human Molecular Genetics. 4th ed. [place unknown]: New York : Garland Science/Taylor & Francis Group, c2011.; 2011.

10-1150 Mayo collaborative services v. Prometheus laboratories, Inc. (03/20/2012). [place unknown: publisher unknown]; 2012 [cited 2016 Dec 5]. Available from: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1150.pdf.

Report on comparative study on protein 3-dimensional (3-D) structure related claims. [place unknown: publisher unknown]; 2002.

Carley M, Hegde D, Marco A, Agostino PD, Eloshway C, Fabrizio K, Hunter D, Kuan J, Oxley J, Mills G, Robinson B, Ross P, Seamans R, Ziedonis A. What is the probability of receiving a US patent? * United States patent and trademark office. [place unknown: publisher unknown]; 2014.

IPWatchdog 2016. Biotechnology. [place unknown]: IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law. Trends in subject matter eligibility for biotechnology inventions - IPWatchdog.com | patents & patent law; 2015 Jul 12 [cited 2016 Dec 6]. Available from: http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/07/12/trends-in-subject-matter-eligibility-for-biotechnology-inventions/id=59738/.

Deputy Commissioner for Patents Examination Policy. Supreme Court Decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. MEMORANDUM: Patent Examining Corps. 2013 Jun 13.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.