Welcome to the digital.law repository at the University of Washington

[8WashJLTech&Arts555] Prometheus v. Mayo: Limited Implications for § 101 Jurisprudence

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Belle, Jessica
dc.contributor.author Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts
dc.date.accessioned 2013-05-22T15:33:38Z
dc.date.available 2013-05-22T15:33:38Z
dc.date.issued 2013-05
dc.identifier.citation 8 WASH. J.L. TECH.& ARTS 555 (2013) en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2157-2534
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1773.1/1241
dc.description Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, Volume 8, Issue 5, Spring 2013 en_US
dc.description.abstract Abstract: The United States Supreme Court recently confirmed the importance of the patent eligible subject matter inquiry under 35 U.S.C. § 101 when assessing whether a claimed invention (“claim”) is patentable in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. The Court also stressed that patents will not be issued to a claim that simply recites a law of nature unless there are additional steps that ensure the claim is sufficiently tailored to not preempt further use of the natural law. The Court’s decision shocked the patent law community. However, decisions by lower courts since have demonstrated that Prometheus has not dramatically altered the landscape of patent eligibility analysis. While the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit remains split as to how narrowly it will read Prometheus, its forthcoming en banc opinion in CLS Bank Int'l v. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. will likely unify its interpretation of the case. The patent law community correctly predicted that Prometheus would deeply impact cases involving diagnostic medical therapeutic techniques. Continuing to follow these lower court cases is an insightful approach to understanding how the patent law landscape has changed since the landmark case. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Seattle: Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts, University of Washington School of Law en_US
dc.subject Intellectual Property en_US
dc.title [8WashJLTech&Arts555] Prometheus v. Mayo: Limited Implications for § 101 Jurisprudence en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2013 en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search digital.law


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account