Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics: The Implications of the Supreme Court Decision

About the Course:

In Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, the Supreme Court held that isolated DNA is not patent eligible subject matter, but that cDNA may be patent eligible subject matter under certain circumstances. This webinar discusses the extent to which additional limitations will be placed on the patentability of biotechnology claims.

Among additional issues discussed during this webinar are:

• How will the Myriad decision impact the “law of nature” exceptions?
• What are some of the limitations to the Myriad decision?
• According to the Myriad decision, what is the distinction between “invention” and “discovery”?
• How does the Myriad decision differ from the Mayo decision?
• Why is it that, because of the Myriad decision, the better targeted personal medicine becomes, the less patent-eligible it will become?
• What are potential variations of post-Myriad legislation and how might such legislation affect life sciences patents?
• What is the history of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit?
• What is the disposition of the newly-appointed Supreme Court justices towards patents?
• What is the proclivity of the Supreme Court to rely on decisions from foreign jurisdictions?
• How influential are Amicus Curiae briefs on Supreme Court justices?
• To what extent should we review decisions relating to plant patents in divining the direction of life science patent decisions?

Course Leader: Gregory A. Castanias, Partner, Jones Day

Greg Castanias is an appellate and intellectual property litigator with extensive Supreme Court and Federal Circuit advocacy experience. He heads Jones Day’s Federal Circuit practice. Greg’s experience includes several arguments and appearances before the U.S. Supreme Court, as well as over 40 arguments and approximately 150 appearances before the Federal Circuit, including some of the most pathbreaking cases in recent years. He has also argued several cases before the other federal courts of appeals and in state supreme courts from Alaska to Connecticut.

Some of the Firm clients Greg has represented in recent years include Abbott, Apple, ARRIS, Chevron, DePuy Spine, DIRECTV, Eastman Chemical, Fenwal, Histogen, Huawei, IBM, Illumina, LabCorp, Limited Brands, MathWorks, Myriad Genetics, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, SanDisk, SAP, SAS Institute, Sinochem, Tesoro, Transocean, and Visa.

Course Length: Approx. 1.0 hours