Impact of Myriad Decisions on Patent Eligibility of Biotechnology Inventions in Australia and the US.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Patent Prosecution June 2013 June 13, 2013.
Advertisements

1 Myriad, Metabolite, Bilski, and Prometheus: The Four Horsemen of the Biotech Apocalypse? Kevin E. Noonan, Ph.D. McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff.
RESTRICTION PRACTICE POLYNUCLEOTIDES POLYPEPTIDES AND FRAGMENTS Christopher Low / James Housel TC1600 /AU 1653 (703)
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY UK Robinson College – Faculty of Law 23rd Annual Fordham Conference Intellectual Property Law and Policy 8 – 9 April 2015 Patent Session.
1 The Myriad Controversy and the Patentability of Genes Joanna T. Brougher Senior Counsel, Vaccinex Inc. Adjunct Lecturer, Harvard School of Public Health.
Proteomics Examination Yvonne (Bonnie) Eyler Technology Center 1600 Art Unit 1646 (703)
1 Types of Vaccines and Patentability Considerations Christina Chan Supervisory Primary Examiner Art Unit 1644 Phone:
Utility and Written Description Steve Kunin Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy Esther Kepplinger Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations.
Benefit to Society Good Science. Human genes claimed in granted U.S. patents Jensen and Murray, Science 310: (14 Oct. 2005) “Specifically, this.
More on Restriction Practice Jim Housel SPE, Art Unit 1648 (703)
1 Homology Language Brian R. Stanton Quality Assurance Specialist Technology Center 1600 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (703)
1 Restriction Examples Biotechnology Customer Partnership Meeting December 2006 Bruce Campell, SPE 1648 / (571)
April 19,2007Markpatent.Org1 DRAFTING & PROCECUTING PHARMA AND BIOTECH PATENTS IN INDIA BY Dr. Rajeshkumar H. Acharya.
Diagnostics: Patent Eligibility and the Industry Perspective
What is Happening to Patent Eligibility and What Can We Do About It? June 24, 2014 Bruce D. Sunstein Denise M. Kettelberger, Ph.D. Sunstein Kann Murphy.
1 Bioinformatics Practice Considerations October 20, 2011 Ling Zhong, Ph.D.
11 Post-Bilski Case Law Update Remy Yucel Director, Central Reexamination Unit.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association CURRENT STATE OF 35 USC 101: “USPTO GUIDELINES ON PRODUCTS OF NATURE, LAWS OF NATURE,
Antibody Patents in India Pravin Anand 14 th October 2011 Anand and Anand.
1. 2 Biotechnology Inventions: Genes & Life Forms and the Impact of Patenting on Upstream Science Nancy J. Linck, Ph.D., J.D. Deputy General Counsel Intellectual.
What’s Patentable? Eduardo Quinones, Ph.D., Esq. Amy A. Dobbelaere, Ph.D.
More on Section 101 Patent Law Prof. Merges
Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. | 600 Atlantic Avenue | Boston, Massachusetts | | fax | wolfgreenfield.com Recent Developments.
“REACH-THROUGH CLAIMS”
1 Biotechnology Partnership Meeting April 17, 2001 James Martinell Senior Level Examiner Technology Center 1600.
1 Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP) Gary Jones SPE, Technology Center 1600 (703)
Restriction Practice for Genus Claims Species Claims Linking Claims and Markush Claims Julie Burke QAS/PM TC1600.
Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical Customer Partnership Topic: Examining Issues When.
Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Raul Tamayo Senior Legal Advisor Office of Patent Legal Administration Biotechnology/Chemical/Pharmaceutical.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 12, 2007 Patent - Subject Matter.
Intellectual Property Boston College Law School February 11, 2009 Patent - Subject Matter, Utility.
Patents 101 April 1, 2002 And now, for something new, useful and not obvious.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Myriad Guidance for Biotechnology and Chemical Practice Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin and.
1 Unity of Invention: Biotech Examples TC1600 Special Program Examiner Julie Burke (571)
Myriad & Prometheus The Aftermath & Future Concerns Mercedes Meyer, Ph.D. AIPLA 1.
Korean Patent System and Recent Changes. Practices in Chemistry. Bong Sig SONG Korean Patent Attorney Y. S. CHANG & ASSOCIATES February 9 th 2008.
AIPLA Biotech Committee Annual Meeting 2011 Practice Strategies In View of Recent Case Law Developments Panel – James Kelley, Eli Lilly and Company – Ling.
Public Policy Considerations and Patent Eligible Subject Matter Relating to Diagnostic Inventions Disclaimer: Any views expressed here are offered in order.
1 “In the Examination Process” CLAIM INTERPRETATION.
© 2011 Barnes & Thornburg LLP. All Rights Reserved. This page, and all information on it, is the property of Barnes & Thornburg LLP which may not be reproduced,
Patenting Biotechnology in Japan and recent hot issues AIPLA Mid-Winter Meeting January 25, 2012 Ayako Kobayashi TMI Associates.
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Technology Center 1600 Michael P. Woodward Unity of Invention: Biotech Examples.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Politics, Health Care, Subject Matter Eligibility, & Patent Preemption Mercedes K. Meyer,
1 Written Description Analysis and Capon v. Eshhar Jeffrey Siew Supervisory Patent Examiner AU 1645 USPTO (571)
Summary on Patents Josiah Hernandez.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association Update on US Caselaw, including Myriad and Hamilton Beach Joerg-Uwe Szipl Griffin and.
© 2011 Dannemann Siemsen. Todos os direitos reservados. Biotech IP issues in Brazil Gustavo Morais May 2011 Gustavo Morais May 2011.
Patentability of Reach-Through Claims Brian R. Stanton Practice Specialist Technology Center 1600 (703)
Personalized Medicine Dr. M. Jawad Hassan. Personalized Medicine Human Genome and SNPs What is personalized medicine? Pharmacogenetics Case study – warfarin.
Trilateral Project WM4 Report on comparative study on Examination Practice Relating to Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) and Haplotypes. Linda S.
Patent Protection of Biotechnological Inventions in China Gesheng Huang Partner Zhongzi Law Office AIPLA Spring Meeting, May 12-14, 2011, San Francisco,
The Future of Gene Patents: Patenting DNA and Other Biological Molecules and Products Following the Supreme Court’s Decision in AMP v. Myriad Genetics.
1 1 AIPLA Firm Logo American Intellectual Property Law Association More Fun with §101 – A Prosecution Perspective for Biotechnology Derived Innovation.
Examination Practice in Applications Presenting “Reach-Through Claims” George Elliott Practice Specialist Technology Center 1600
Mayo v. Prometheus Labs – The Backdrop June 12, 2012 © 2012, all rights reserved.
Myriad The Future of DNA Claims Mercedes Meyer, Ph.D., JD AIPLA 1.
© 2012 Cooley LLP, Five Palo Alto Square, 3000 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA The content of this packet is an introduction to Cooley LLP’s capabilities.
PATENTS, INTEGRATED CIRCUITS, AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGNS Presented By: Navdeep World Trade Organization.
1 Utility Guidelines, Homology Claims and Anti-Sense Molecule Claims Drew Hissong, Ph.D. dhissong*sughrue.com Sughrue Mion, PLLC
Introduction The Patentability of Human Genes Is patenting human genes moral? Should it be legal? Should there be international intervention?
Surviving Subject Matter in the Post Prometheus/Myriad World Lesley Rapaport LRR Patent Law Denise M. Kettelberger Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timers LLP Carmela.
Class 24: Finish Remedies, then Subject Matter Patent Law Spring 2007 Professor Petherbridge.
Jody Blanke, Professor Computer Information Systems and Law 1.
Intellectual Property & Contemporary Issues of Biotechnology Law
Patenting Biotechnology in Japan and recent hot issues
Recent USPTO Developments on Subject Matter Eligibility
JUSTIN TURNER QC.
Gene Patenting Connecticut Invention Convention
Presentation transcript:

Impact of Myriad Decisions on Patent Eligibility of Biotechnology Inventions in Australia and the US

VACCINES PATENTS

WIPO VACCINES PATENTS

GENE PATENTS “…to make, hire, sell (or otherwise dispose of) the product, offer to make, sell, hire (or otherwise dispose of) it, use and import it and keep it for the purpose of doing any of those things” “excludes others from synthesizing the gene..." “excludes others from using the gene for any purpose…" “excludes others from selling the gene in a product …" Gene Claim

CLAIMS 1. An isolated polynucleotide comprising a nucleotide sequence set out in SEQ ID NO: 1 or a variant or a fragment thereof. 2. An isolated polypeptide encoded by the polynucleotide of claim A method for diagnosing a disease in a subject, the method comprising detecting levels of the polynucleotide of claim 1 or the polypeptide of claim 2 in a biological sample from the subject, wherein detection of increased levels compared to a control is indicative of the disease. 5. A method for treating a disease in a subject, the method comprising administering to the subject a therapeutically effective amount of the pharmaceutical composition of claim A pharmaceutical composition comprising the polynucleotide of claim 1 or the polypeptide of claim 2, and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. GENE PATENTS

VACCINE PATENTS CLAIMS 1. A vaccine comprising a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier and a polypeptide comprising an amino acid sequence set out in SEQ ID NO: A vaccine comprising an irradiated microorganism ‘X’ and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier. 1. A vaccine comprising microorganism ‘X’ and a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, wherein the microorganism is attenuated by a mutation introduced into gene ‘Y’. 2. A method for preventing a disease in a subject, the method comprising administering the vaccine of claim 1 to the subject.

“We merely hold that genes and the information they encode are not patent eligible under §101 simply because they have been isolated from the surrounding genetic material.”

V V V Federal Circuit Court Of Appeals US Supreme Court

BRCA1

Yvonne D’Arcy “…the claimed product is not the same as the naturally occurring product. There are structural differences but, more importantly, there are functional differences because of isolation.” - full federal court “A consideration of whether the composition of matter is a "product of nature"; or whether a microorganism is "markedly different" from something that already exists in nature.” –full federal court