Supreme Court Declines to Decide Case on the Patentability of a Law of Nature
Case:Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabolite Labs., Inc., No. 04–607 (S. Ct. 6/22/06)
The Supreme Court decided not to decide a case posing the question of whether a blood test patent was invalid because it patented a basic law of nature. Justice Breyer dissented in an opinion joined by Justices Stevens and Souter, arguing that the case posed important questions that should be decided now.
In his dissent, Justice Breyer acknowledged that there were technical reasons not to decide the case because the invalidity questions had not been considered by the Federal Circuit. However, Justice Breyer argued that the case involved important questions affecting medical research that should be resolved sooner rather than later. Justice Breyer also explained his view that the patent was invalid because it would impermissibly patent a law of nature.
The Supreme Court decided not to decide a case posing the question of whether a blood test patent was invalid because it patented a basic law of nature. Justice Breyer dissented in an opinion joined by Justices Stevens and Souter, arguing that the case posed important questions that should be decided now.
In his dissent, Justice Breyer acknowledged that there were technical reasons not to decide the case because the invalidity questions had not been considered by the Federal Circuit. However, Justice Breyer argued that the case involved important questions affecting medical research that should be resolved sooner rather than later. Justice Breyer also explained his view that the patent was invalid because it would impermissibly patent a law of nature.

0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home