Case Law Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.

Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.

Document Cited Authorities (19) Cited in (1385) Related (5)

Christopher A. Hansen, Glenwood, MD, for Petitioners.

Donald B. Verrilli, Jr., Solicitor General, for the United States as amicus curiae, by special leave of the court, supporting neither party.

Gregory A. Castanias, Washington, DC, for Respondents.

Daniel B. Ravicher, Sabrina Y. Hassan, Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT), Benjamin N. Cardozo, School of Law, New York, NY, Christopher A. Hansen, Counsel of Record, Sandra S. Park, Lenora M. Lapidus, Steven R. Shapiro, New York, NY, for Petitioners.

Justice THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Respondent Myriad Genetics, Inc. (Myriad), discovered the precise location and sequence of two human genes, mutations of which can substantially increase the risks of breast and ovarian cancer. Myriad obtained a number of patents based upon its discovery. This case involves claims from three of them and requires us to resolve whether a naturally occurring segment of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by virtue of its isolation from the rest of the human genome. We also address the patent eligibility of synthetically created DNA known as complementary DNA (cDNA), which contains the same protein-coding information found in a segment of natural DNA but omits portions within the DNA segment that do not code for proteins. For the reasons that follow, we hold that a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but that cDNA is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring. We, therefore, affirm in part and reverse in part the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

I
A

Genes form the basis for hereditary traits in living organisms. See generally Association for Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, 702 F.Supp.2d 181, 192–211 (S.D.N.Y.2010). The human genome consists of approximately 22,000 genes packed into 23 pairs of chromosomes. Each gene is encoded as DNA, which takes the shape of the familiar " double helix" that Doctors James Watson and Francis Crick first described in 1953. Each "cross-bar" in the DNA helix consists of two chemically joined nucleotides. The possible nucleotides are adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C), and guanine (G), each of which binds naturally with another nucleotide: A pairs with T; C pairs with G. The nucleotide cross-bars are chemically connected to a sugar-phosphate backbone that forms the outside framework of the DNA helix. Sequences of DNA nucleotides contain the information necessary to create strings of amino acids, which in turn are used in the body to build proteins. Only some DNA nucleotides, however, code for amino acids; these nucleotides are known as "exons." Nucleotides that do not code for amino acids, in contrast, are known as "introns."

Creation of proteins from DNA involves two principal steps, known as transcription and translation. In transcription, the bonds between DNA nucleotides separate, and the DNA helix unwinds into two single strands. A single strand is used as a template to create a complementary ribonucleic acid (RNA) strand. The nucleotides on the DNA strand pair naturally with their counterparts, with the exception that RNA uses the nucleotide base uracil (U) instead of thymine (T). Transcription results in a single strand RNA molecule, known as pre-RNA, whose nucleotides form an inverse image of the DNA strand from which it was created. Pre–RNA still contains nucleotides corresponding to both the exons and introns in the DNA molecule. The pre-RNA is then naturally "spliced" by the physical removal of the introns. The resulting product is a strand of RNA that contains nucleotides corresponding only to the exons from the original DNA strand. The exons-only strand is known as messenger RNA (mRNA), which creates amino acids through translation. In translation, cellular structures known as ribosomes read each set of three nucleotides, known as codons, in the mRNA. Each codon either tells the ribosomes which of the 20 possible amino acids to synthesize or provides a stop signal that ends amino acid production.

DNA's informational sequences and the processes that create mRNA, amino acids, and proteins occur naturally within cells. Scientists can, however, extract DNA from cells using well known laboratory methods. These methods allow scientists to isolate specific segments of DNA—for instance, a particular gene or part of a gene—which can then be further studied, manipulated, or used. It is also possible to create DNA synthetically through processes similarly well known in the field of genetics. One such method begins with an mRNA molecule and uses the natural bonding properties of nucleotides to create a new, synthetic DNA molecule. The result is the inverse of the mRNA's inverse image of the original DNA, with one important distinction: Because the natural creation of mRNA involves splicing that removes introns, the synthetic DNA created from mRNA also contains only the exon sequences. This synthetic DNA created in the laboratory from mRNA is known as complementary DNA (cDNA).

Changes in the genetic sequence are called mutations. Mutations can be as small as the alteration of a single nucleotide—a change affecting only one letter in the genetic code. Such small-scale changes can produce an entirely different amino acid or can end protein production altogether. Large changes, involving the deletion, rearrangement, or duplication of hundreds or even millions of nucleotides, can result in the elimination, misplacement, or duplication of entire genes. Some mutations are harmless, but others can cause disease or increase the risk of disease. As a result, the study of genetics can lead to valuable medical breakthroughs.

B

This case involves patents filed by Myriad after it made one such medical breakthrough. Myriad discovered the precise location and sequence of what are now known as the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Mutations in these genes can dramatically increase an individual's risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. The average American woman has a 12– to 13–percent risk of developing breast cancer, but for women with certain genetic mutations, the risk can range between 50 and 80 percent for breast cancer and between 20 and 50 percent for ovarian cancer. Before Myriad's discovery of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, scientists knew that heredity played a role in establishing a woman's risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer, but they did not know which genes were associated with those cancers.

Myriad identified the exact location of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes on chromosomes 17 and 13. Chromosome 17 has approximately 80 million nucleotides, and chromosome 13 has approximately 114 million. Associationfor Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, 689 F.3d 1303, 1328 (C.A.Fed.2012). Within those chromosomes, the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are each about 80,000 nucleotides long. If just exons are counted, the BRCA1 gene is only about 5,500 nucleotides long; for the BRCA2 gene, that number is about 10,200. Ibid. Knowledge of the location of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes allowed Myriad to determine their typical nucleotide sequence.1 That information, in turn, enabled Myriad to develop medical tests that are useful for detecting mutations in a patient's BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and thereby assessing whether the patient has an increased risk of cancer.

Once it found the location and sequence of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, Myriad sought and obtained a number of patents. Nine composition claims from three of those patents are at issue in this case.2 See id., at 1309, and n. 1 (noting composition claims). Claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 from the '282 patent are representative. The first claim asserts a patent on " [a]n isolated DNA coding for a BRCA1 polypeptide," which has "the amino acid sequence set forth in SEQ ID NO:2." App. 822. SEQ ID NO:2 sets forth a list of 1,863 amino acids that the typical BRCA1 gene encodes. See id., at 785–790. Put differently, claim 1 asserts a patent claim on the DNA code that tells a cell to produce the string of BRCA1 amino acids listed in SEQ ID NO:2.

Claim 2 of the '282 patent operates similarly. It claims "[t]he isolated DNA of claim 1, wherein said DNA has the nucleotide sequence set forth in SEQ ID NO:1." Id., at 822. Like SEQ ID NO:2, SEQ ID NO:1 sets forth a long list of data, in this instance the sequence of cDNA that codes for the BRCA1 amino acids listed in claim 1. Importantly, SEQ ID NO:1 lists only the cDNA exons in the BRCA1 gene, rather than a full DNA sequence containing both exons and introns. See id., at 779 (stating that SEQ ID NO:1's "MOLECULE TYPE:" is "cDNA"). As a result, the Federal Circuit recognized that claim 2 asserts a patent on the cDNA nucleotide sequence listed in SEQ ID NO:1, which codes for the typical BRCA1 gene. 689 F.3d, at 1326, n. 9; id., at 1337 (Moore, J., concurring in part); id., at 1356 (Bryson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

Claim 5 of the '282 patent claims a subset of the data in claim 1. In particular, it claims "[a]n isolated DNA having at least 15 nucleotides of the DNA of claim 1." App. 822. The practical effect of claim 5 is to assert a patent on any series of 15 nucleotides that exist in the typical BRCA1 gene. Because the BRCA1 gene is thousands of nucleotides long, even BRCA1 genes with substantial mutations are likely to contain at least one segment of 15 nucleotides that correspond to the typical BRCA1 gene. Similarly, claim 6 of the '282 patent claims "[a]n isolated DNA having at least 15 nucleotides of the DNA of claim 2." Ibid. This claim operates similarly to claim 5, except that it references the cDNA-based claim 2. The remaining claims at issue...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2018
In re Biogen 755 Patent Litig.
"... ... sclerosis ("MS"), that Defendants EMD Serono, Inc. ("Serono") and Pfizer Inc. ("Pfizer") ... , or even brilliant," Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas – 2017
Erfindergemeinschaft UroPep GbR v. Eli Lilly & Co.
"... ... Wi–Lan, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. , 811 F.3d 455, 461 (Fed. Cir ... applying section 101, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit – 2019
Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Servs., LLC
"... ... involving cDNA held eligible in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas – 2019
Slyce Acquisition Inc. v. Syte - Visual Conception Ltd.
"... ... 2347, 189 L.Ed.2d 296 (2014) (quoting Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, 589, ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2022
AuthWallet, LLC v. Block, Inc.
"... ... abstract ideas are not patentable." Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, 589, ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 books and journal articles
Document | Núm. 104-3, March 2019 – 2019
Paths or Fences: Patents, Copyrights, and the Constitution
"..., 561 U.S. at 601–02. 167 . See, e.g. , Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 216–17 (2014); Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 589 (2012); Diamond , 447 U.S. at 307. 168 . Mayo Collaborative Servs. , 566 U.S. at 86; see Bilski , 561 U.S. at 65..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
A New Frontier in Patent Bar Ethics?
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
An Interview with Li-Hsien (Lily) Rin-Laures
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
Patenting Nature
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 11-4, March 2019 – 2019
The Colorblind Patent System and Black Inventors
"...U.S. 593; Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012); Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013); Alice , 134 S. Ct. 2347. 6. Flook , 437 U.S. at 592. 7. See, e.g. , Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 379–82 (19..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial
5 firm's commentaries
Document | JD Supra United States – 2019
Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo Collaborative Services -- The Concurrences
"...Part IV of his opinion) that: [T]here is tension between Mayo and the Supreme Court's later decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013), and that the holding of Mayo may be overbroad. The language of § 101 does cover "discover[ies]," 35 U.S...."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2019
Updates on Diagnostic Method Patent Eligibility
"...Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012). [3] Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2014); Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. Cepheid, 905 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2018); Cleveland Clinic Found. v. True Hea..."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2018
Global Patent Prosecution Newsletter - October 2018: How To Do The Two-Step In The United States: The Current State of Patent-Eligible Subject Matter
"...Int’l, Inc., 534 U.S. 124 (2001). [v] Natural Alternatives Int’l v. Allmax Nutrition, Inc., 258 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (S.D. Cal. 2017); Myriad, 569 U.S. 576; In re BRCA1, 774 F.3d 755; In re Roslin. 750 F.3d 1333. [vi] Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013). ..."
Document | LexBlog United States – 2021
Two Concurrent but Very Different Cert Petitions Seek Supreme Court Review of “Laws of Nature” Exception
"...petition first. Ariosa’s Petition: An Accused Infringer’s Perspective As its primary focus, Ariosa’s petition argues that in the 2013 Myriad case, the Supreme Court laid down the clear rule that “a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because..."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2021
Two Concurrent but Very Different Cert Petitions Seek Supreme Court Review of “Laws of Nature” Exception
"...petition first. Ariosa’s Petition: An Accused Infringer’s Perspective As its primary focus, Ariosa’s petition argues that in the 2013 Myriad case, the Supreme Court laid down the clear rule that “a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 books and journal articles
Document | Núm. 104-3, March 2019 – 2019
Paths or Fences: Patents, Copyrights, and the Constitution
"..., 561 U.S. at 601–02. 167 . See, e.g. , Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 216–17 (2014); Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 589 (2012); Diamond , 447 U.S. at 307. 168 . Mayo Collaborative Servs. , 566 U.S. at 86; see Bilski , 561 U.S. at 65..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
A New Frontier in Patent Bar Ethics?
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
An Interview with Li-Hsien (Lily) Rin-Laures
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 12-2, November 2019 – 2019
Patenting Nature
"...& Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Bayh-Dole Reform and the Progress of Biomedicine , 66 L. & Contemp. Probs. 289 (2003). 5. 566 U.S. 66 (2012). 6. 569 U.S. 576 (2013). 7. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010). 8. For further discussion of ..."
Document | Núm. 11-4, March 2019 – 2019
The Colorblind Patent System and Black Inventors
"...U.S. 593; Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012); Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013); Alice , 134 S. Ct. 2347. 6. Flook , 437 U.S. at 592. 7. See, e.g. , Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 379–82 (19..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2018
In re Biogen 755 Patent Litig.
"... ... sclerosis ("MS"), that Defendants EMD Serono, Inc. ("Serono") and Pfizer Inc. ("Pfizer") ... , or even brilliant," Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas – 2017
Erfindergemeinschaft UroPep GbR v. Eli Lilly & Co.
"... ... Wi–Lan, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. , 811 F.3d 455, 461 (Fed. Cir ... applying section 101, Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S ... "
Document | U.S. Court of Appeals — Federal Circuit – 2019
Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Servs., LLC
"... ... involving cDNA held eligible in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas – 2019
Slyce Acquisition Inc. v. Syte - Visual Conception Ltd.
"... ... 2347, 189 L.Ed.2d 296 (2014) (quoting Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, 589, ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York – 2022
AuthWallet, LLC v. Block, Inc.
"... ... abstract ideas are not patentable." Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. , 569 U.S. 576, 589, ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 firm's commentaries
Document | JD Supra United States – 2019
Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo Collaborative Services -- The Concurrences
"...Part IV of his opinion) that: [T]here is tension between Mayo and the Supreme Court's later decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013), and that the holding of Mayo may be overbroad. The language of § 101 does cover "discover[ies]," 35 U.S...."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2019
Updates on Diagnostic Method Patent Eligibility
"...Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014); Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66 (2012). [3] Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2014); Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. Cepheid, 905 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2018); Cleveland Clinic Found. v. True Hea..."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2018
Global Patent Prosecution Newsletter - October 2018: How To Do The Two-Step In The United States: The Current State of Patent-Eligible Subject Matter
"...Int’l, Inc., 534 U.S. 124 (2001). [v] Natural Alternatives Int’l v. Allmax Nutrition, Inc., 258 F. Supp. 3d 1170 (S.D. Cal. 2017); Myriad, 569 U.S. 576; In re BRCA1, 774 F.3d 755; In re Roslin. 750 F.3d 1333. [vi] Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013). ..."
Document | LexBlog United States – 2021
Two Concurrent but Very Different Cert Petitions Seek Supreme Court Review of “Laws of Nature” Exception
"...petition first. Ariosa’s Petition: An Accused Infringer’s Perspective As its primary focus, Ariosa’s petition argues that in the 2013 Myriad case, the Supreme Court laid down the clear rule that “a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because..."
Document | JD Supra United States – 2021
Two Concurrent but Very Different Cert Petitions Seek Supreme Court Review of “Laws of Nature” Exception
"...petition first. Ariosa’s Petition: An Accused Infringer’s Perspective As its primary focus, Ariosa’s petition argues that in the 2013 Myriad case, the Supreme Court laid down the clear rule that “a naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial