An LML Research Group has just published its fourth article in Nature Biotechnology: 'After six years, what has been Mayo’s impact on patent applications related to biotech, diagnostics, and personalized medicine?' (available here), examines the impact of the US Supreme Court's decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. on patent subject-matter eligibility and patent prosecution of biotech related patent applications before the USPTO.
The article was co-authored by Prof. Mateo Aboy, Dr Cristina Crespo, Dr Kathy Liddell, Prof. Timo Minssen, and Dr John Liddicoat.
This is the fourth publication by this LML Research Group to be accepted by Nature Biotechnology in three years. They previously published:
- 'Was the Myriad decision a 'surgical strike' on isolated DNA patents, or does it have wider impacts?' (2018), an empirical investigation into the effects of the US Supreme Court's decision in Myriad on patent prosecution for nature-based products beyond isolated DNA;
- 'After Myriad, what makes a gene patent claim 'markedly different' from nature?' (2017), which identified the types of claim amendments which successfully transformed isolated gene claims from ineligible subject matter into patent eligible inventions; and
- 'Myriad's impact on gene patents' (2016), which was a post-Myriad empirical patent landscape analysis.
Empirical patent studies continue to be a core focus of LML research, and will feature significantly in LML's contribution to the CeBIL research programme.