Perspective
Apr. 3, 2012
Justices weigh in on patents in field of personalized medicine
Patents must contain sufficient elements to ensure that it is not a claim on natural law itself. By Jason G. Harp and George Yu of Schiff Hardin LLP
Euclid famously said, "the laws of nature are but the mathematical thoughts of God." Not to be outdone, the U.S. Supreme Court has long held that laws of nature are not patentable under 35 U.S.C. Section 101, which governs the scope of patentable subject matter. See, for example, Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981). More recently, the Supreme Court refined the definition of patentable subject matter when it unanim...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In