Bereskin & Parr LLP
Subscribe Twitter Linked-in RSS
  • About Us
  • Our People






  • Services
  • News & Publications
  • Events
  • Offices
  • Students
  • Careers

News & Publications

FIND AN ARTICLE

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

Keep informed about the latest news
and updates from Bereskin & Parr



 

MEDIA CONTACT
Evelyn Dempsey
Manager, Business Development & Marketing
416.957.1182

 

 Bookmark this page  Print this page

Myriad applied: More news for diagnostic patents

November 7, 2013

Authors: Noel Courage and Carmela De Luca

Last week, in Ariosa Diagnostics Inc v. Sequenom Inc, a district court  issued a declaratory judgement, finding that claims directed to a diagnostic method involving detection of cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) were invalid as unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  The case is only a district court decision which typically has no binding precedential effect. It is also likely to be appealed.  The district court’s opinion was based on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2107 (2013) discussed here

The patent in question related to the detection of paternally inherited cffDNA in maternal plasma or serum.

In this case the parties had agreed “that neither cffDNA nor the discovery of cffDNA in maternal plasma or serum is patentable, because the presence of cffDNA in maternal plasma or serum is a natural phenomenon”.

The Court found that conventional techniques of DNA detection, known at the time of the invention, were applied to paternally inherited cffDNA as opposed to other types of DNA. Thus, the Court concluded that the only inventive concept contained in the patent was the discovery of cffDNA, which is not patentable.  The Court’s decision does not appear to adequately take into account that it often requires inventiveness to use DNA detection tools.

The Court also concluded that the claims in question also wholly preempted all known methods of detecting cffDNA at that time and that the claims at issue posed a substantial risk of preempting the natural phenomenon, which the court said supported its conclusion that the claims were  not drawn to patent eligible subject matter.

If this decision is followed or upheld on appeal, it will add to the already existing hurdle to be surmounted for obtaining broad patent protection for diagnostic claims that rely on novel correlations. More insight on the patent eligibility of diagnostic claims is likely to be garnered in the not too distant future in light of the various lawsuits between Myriad and its competitors which are presently before the courts.

Information on this website is for information only. It is not, and should not be taken as, legal advice. You should not rely on, or take or not take any action, based upon this information. Professional legal advice should be promptly obtained. Bereskin & Parr LLP professionals will be pleased to advise you.

 

About Us

Overview
People Clients Diversity and Inclusion

Accolades
Archives

Offices

Hours of Operation

Our People

All

Refine search by
Type Office Practice School

Services

Patents
Automotive Chemical Cleantech Electrical & Computer Technology Financial Technology Life Sciences Mechanical & Industrial Processes Medical Devices Nanotechnology Oil & Gas Plant Breeders’ Rights

Industrial Designs

Trademarks

Litigation

IP Management & Strategic Counselling

Licensing & Transactions

Regulatory, Advertising & Marketing

Copyright & Digital Media

News & Publications

Newsroom
Archive

Articles
Article Archives

Newsletters

Media & Press

Litigation Cases
Patent Trademark Copyright

Subscribe

Webinars

Students

Overview

Articling Program

Summer Program

Recruitment
Articling Recruitment Second Year Recruitment First Year Recruitment Career Fairs

B&P Your University

Current Students

University Prizes

How to Apply

Events

Events Calendar

Student Events Calendar

Offices

Careers

Support Staff

Professionals

Students

Languages

English

Français

中国语

日本語

Search