Exciting new series on “Voice, Body and Movement for Lawyers – How to connect with the jury and find Justice Through Dramatic Technique!”
Click here to find out moreThe question of what subject matter is eligible to be protected by a patent under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and what subject matter is an unpatentable law of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract idea has been brought to the forefront in a number of recent cases. The Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Mayo Collborative Servs. v. Promethueus Labs., Inc. (Mayo) relates to whether certain medical diagnostic methods are patent-eligible or unpatentable “laws of nature.” The Federal Circuit’s decision in Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. USPTO and Myriad Genetics (Myriad) (August 16, 2012), remanded for reconsideration by the Supreme Court after Mayo, addresses the patent eligibility of isolated DNA and related diagnostic methods. Join Michael J. Kasdan of Amster, Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP, as he discusses the impact of Mayo and Myriad in determining what pharmaceutical and biotechnology products and methods may be patented. And because Mayo and Myriad are also part of a larger wave of recent jurisprudence regarding patent-eligibility that has arisen in other fields, such as financial products, business methods, and computer software, our presenter also discusses the impact of these decisions on patent eligibility in other fields.
