Tag Archives: USPTO

BIO Submits Joint Supplemental Comments on the USPTO March Guidance

Supreme Court

Last week BIO, alongside a number of member companies and private individuals, submitted supplemental comments to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office concerning their March 2014 Guidance on patent subject matter eligibility. In July, BIO and international bio-industry associations had submitted comments to the USPTO expressing concern about the Guidance, and its impact on the patent eligibility of biotechnology inventions. Since July, USPTO staff has indicated a final revision to the Guidance would be released Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Should the USPTO Allow the Patenting of Living Organisms?

US PTO

Last year, a question was submitted to the GMO advocacy website GMOAnswers about whether or not the USPTO should allow the patenting of living organisms. Under 35 U.S.C. 101, “the laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas have been held not patentable.” Therefore the USPTO cannot and does not award patents on living organisms that were merely discovered in nature. However, the U.S. Supreme Court Ruled in Diamond v. Chakrabarty that a “nonnaturally occurring Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

PTO Patent Examinations in the wake of Mayo and Myriad

stopped-media-115x76

Biotech patent applicants are finding themselves in uncharted waters.   After the Supreme Court’s decisions in Mayo Collaborative Svs. v. Prometheus Labs and Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, companies have been trying to understand how these decisions will impact the industry. A recent study supported by BIO, in collaboration with Bloomberg BNA and the law firm of Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi analyzed how Mayo and Myriad have changed patent eligibility for biotechnology. Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Gene Patent Questions Remain: USPTO Issues Examiner Guidelines

Supreme Court

The new Patent Office guidance, issued March 4, extends the Supreme Court’s legal logic into areas that were neither mentioned nor decided in the Myriad case itself. Myriad went to the Supreme Court exclusively on the question whether human genes are patentable. And human genetic diagnostic testing was the only context in which the Supreme Court thought about this question. The Supreme Court also acknowledged that it is not a scientific expert, and perhaps recognized Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  Leave a comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , ,

“Should the USPTO allow the patenting of living organisms?”

shutterstock_1092009

Most people associate patents with mechanical or electronic devices, new chemical substances, intricate machines or other inanimate things. The notion that patents are also available for living things may be puzzling at first. A patent is a form of property right that allows its owner a certain measure of control over how others may make, use or sell the patented invention. Surely the inventor of e.g. a new gyroscope sensor (like those used in Segway Read More >

Patently BIOtech  |  1 Comment  |  Email This Post
Tags: , ,