Patents | Published:

Was the Myriad decision a 'surgical strike' on isolated DNA patents, or does it have wider impacts?

Nature Biotechnology volume 36, pages 11461149 (2018) | Download Citation

Five years later, what are the wider impacts of the US Supreme Court's Myriad decision on subject-matter eligibility and patent prosecution for nature-based products beyond isolated DNA?

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2107 (2013).

  2. 2.

    , & Brief for amicus curiae Eric S. Lander in support of neither party (2013).

  3. 3.

    , & Sci. Transl. Med. 5, 192ed9 (2013).

  4. 4.

    et al. Brief for amicus curiae The Biotechnology Industry Organization in support of respondents (2013).

  5. 5.

    & Science 341, 137–138 (2013).

  6. 6.

    UC Davis Law Rev. 49, 1881–1940 (2015).

  7. 7.

    Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 100 S. Ct. 2204 (1980).

  8. 8.

    Funk Brothers Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 68 S. Ct. 440 (1948).

  9. 9.

    Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012).

  10. 10.

    Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014).

  11. 11.

    USPTO. 2106 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility [R-08.2017]

  12. 12.

    In Re Roslin Institute (Edinburgh), 750 F.3d 1333 (2014).

  13. 13.

    & Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 292–294 (2016).

  14. 14.

    & Annu. Rev. Genet. 49, 161–182 (2015).

  15. 15.

    Notre Dame Law Rev. 90, 505–542 (2016).

  16. 16.

    Harv. J. Law Technol. 30, 569–600 (2017).

  17. 17.

    in Patents4Life (2015).

  18. 18.

    & in Bloomberg BNA – Life Sciences Law & Industry Report (2015).

  19. 19.

    , , & Nat. Biotechnol. 34, 1119–1123 (2016).

  20. 20.

    , , , & Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 820–825 (2017).

  21. 21.

    D'Arcy v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 325 ALR 100 (2015).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Mateo Aboy, Cristina Crespo, Kathleen Liddell, Johnathon Liddicoat and Matthew Jordan are at the Centre for Law, Medicine, and Life Sciences, Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

    • Mateo Aboy
    • , Cristina Crespo
    • , Kathleen Liddell
    • , Johnathon Liddicoat
    •  & Matthew Jordan

Authors

  1. Search for Mateo Aboy in:

  2. Search for Cristina Crespo in:

  3. Search for Kathleen Liddell in:

  4. Search for Johnathon Liddicoat in:

  5. Search for Matthew Jordan in:

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mateo Aboy.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Text

    Supplementary Data and Methods

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4308

Newsletter Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing