Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Mayo v Prometheus: The Eternal Conundrum of Patentability vs Patent-Eligibility|
|Keywords:||Patentability;Intellectual property;Biomedical claims;Patent-eligibility|
|Abstract:||In 2012, the US Supreme Court adjudicated a profound medical claim in Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories Inc, which has the potential of radically altering patent law and US § 101 jurisprudence. The judgment came as a shock to the patent community; however, judgments of the lower courts therewith have echoed similar decisions to show the judgment in Prometheus simply cited Supreme Court jurisprudence. This paper talks about the judgment and its effects on the rulings of the Federal Circuit as well as District Courts, and its effect on medical claims. It gives an insight into patent law in the United States and where it is headed. While the Federal Circuit remains split as to how narrowly it should construe Prometheus so as to apply it to other cases, its forthcoming opinion en banc on CLS Bank Int’l v Alice Corp Pvt Ltd is likely to unify its interpretation. What is yet to be seen is how broadly the District Courts will interpret the judgment so as to judge similar medical claims. The process has already started, as is explained in this paper; the effects of which however are too early to be discussed.|
|ISSN:||0975-1076 (Online); 0971-7544 (Print)|
|Appears in Collections:|| JIPR Vol.19(6) [November 2014]|
Items in NOPR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.