Patents and Diagnostic Methods in the U.S.: The Subject Matter Eligibility Trap

Abstract

Diagnostic methods have been gaining medical recognition and social importance as innovations that can be useful to provide individuals with a diagnosis, prognosis or prediction with regard to a condition that they currently have or that they are in risk of developing. Despite the great amount of resources deployed to produce these health technologies and their potential benefits for healthcare systems and patients or prospective patients alike, their exclusive protection in the United States has faced resistance from patent examiners and courts on the basis that diagnostics constitute a dubious innovation. Inconsistent arguments used for the refusal of patent protection have led to a labyrinth where innovators in the diagnostics sector cannot reasonably expect their application or their protection after the patent is in place to stand. 

This paper aims to convey the doctrine of subject matter eligibility as applied to diagnostic methods and the relevant guidelines and case law. In doing so, it aims to depict the pitfalls resulting from the general application of a non-patentability rule to diagnostics, and to suggest opportunities still available for innovators to overcome uncertainty by filing compliant applications while maximizing the likeliness of enjoying protection once the patent is awarded.

https://doi.org/10.5912/jcb876
Requires Subscription or Fee PDF

Unless specified by prior arrangement, the author agrees to the following terms and assurances:

  1. For myself and on behalf of the other authors listed on this work, I assign to thinkBiotech LLC the copyright* in the contribution for the full term throughout the world.
  2. I/we further give to the following assurances
    1. I am the sole author of the contribution, or, if not, I have the written authority of the other authors to transfer the copyright* to thinkBiotech LLC and give these warranties;
    2. I and (where appropriate) the other authors are entitled to transfer the copyright to thinkBiotech LLC and no one else would be entitled to prevent us from publishing the contribution;
    3. To the best of my/our knowledge, all the facts in the contribution are true and accurate;
    4. The content of the contribution is entirely original to me (and where appropriate to the other authors) or, if not, the written permission of the owner of the copyright in any material copied from elsewhere has been obtained for all media (all such permissions to be attached to the contribution as supplementary files);
    5. Nothing in the contribution is obscene or libellous;
    6. Nothing in the contribution infringes any duty of confidentiality which I/or the other authors may owe to anyone else.
    7. I and/or the other authors have obtained the appropriate clearances from my/our employer(s) or other concerned institution(s).
* Works by US government employees prepared as part of official duties are in the public domain and the authors are therefore exempt from copyright assignment.