The Continuing Saga Of Mayo V. Prometheus

Law360, New York (February 25, 2014, 12:47 PM EST) -- For decades, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court had assured patentees in the biotechnology space that “anything under the sun that is made by man” could be patent-eligible.[1] This understanding was upended in 2012, when the Supreme Court revisited the question of patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc.[2]

In Prometheus, the court explained that a method of optimizing a therapy was not patentable when that method simply relied upon a law of nature — the relationship between concentrations...
To view the full article, register now.