Does Patent Protection for Personalized Medicine Still Exist in the USA?
2016; Future Science Ltd; Volume: 5; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.4155/ppa.15.46
ISSN2046-8962
Autores Tópico(s)Law, AI, and Intellectual Property
ResumoPharmaceutical Patent AnalystVol. 5, No. 2 EditorialDoes patent protection for personalized medicine still exist in the USA?Joan EllisJoan Ellis*Author for correspondence: E-mail Address: jellis@dickinsonwright.com Dickinson Wright PLLC, 1875 I St, NW, Washington, DC 20006, USAPublished Online:18 Feb 2016https://doi.org/10.4155/ppa.15.46AboutSectionsView ArticleView Full TextPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInReddit View articleKeywords: court decisionspersonalised medicineUS patentsReferences1 Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S.Ct. 1289 (2012).Google Scholar2 Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. ("Myriad"), 569 U.S., 133 S.Ct. 2107 (2013).Google Scholar3 Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015).Google Scholar4 Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank ("CLS Bank"), 134 S.Ct. 2347 (2014).Google Scholar5 Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 130 S.Ct. 3218 (2010).Google Scholar6 Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981).Google Scholar7 Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584 (1978).Google Scholar8 See, e.g., Funk Brothers Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 U.S. 127 (1948).Google Scholar9 Mayo, 132 S.Ct. at 1298, quoting Diamond v. Diehr 450 U.S. 175, 101 S.Ct.1048 (1981).Google Scholar10 Myriad, 133 S.Ct. at 2111 (2013).Google Scholar11 Myriad, 133 S.Ct. at 2120 (2013).Crossref, Google Scholar12 Exergen Corp. v. Brooklands Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114699, *20 (D. Mass. 2015).Google Scholar13 Exergen Corp. v. Brooklands Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 128940, *16 (D. Mass. 2015).Google Scholar14 Affinity Labs of Tex., LLC. v. Directv LLC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92889, *24 (W.D. Tex. 2015).Google Scholar15 Inventor Holdings, LLC v. Gameloft, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132389, *34–35 (D. Del. 2015).Google ScholarFiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Vol. 5, No. 2 Follow us on social media for the latest updates Metrics Downloaded 41 times History Published online 18 February 2016 Published in print March 2016 Information© Future Science LtdKeywordscourt decisionspersonalised medicineUS patentsDisclaimerJ Ellis is a member of the Washington, DC office of Dickinson Wright, PLLC. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the views of Dickinson Wright or its clients. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.Financial & competing interests disclosureThe author has no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.PDF download
Referência(s)