decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Laws of Nature | 81 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Laws of Nature
Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, April 02 2013 @ 07:05 AM EDT
The Supreme Court do not just judicially exclude what nature does, but what nature makes. In Mayo, they include naturally occurring plants as excluded subject matter.
  1. DNA embedded in chromosomes in the human body
  2. Cell-free DNA found in fragments in blood plasma etc.
  3. DNA separated from other cellular matter by a process known as ‘lysis’
  4. “Isolated DNA” formed by splitting up the DNA extracted through lysis
  5. So-called cDNA formed by a translation process DNA->RNA->cDNA that removes non-coding base sequences from the DNA fragment, to yield a DNA fragment that encodes for the same protein as the original isolated DNA
  6. rDNA or recombinant DNA, formed by genetic engineering.
As you say, 1. and 2. are judicially excluded as laws of nature. The 'lysis' process in 3. might well be stutory matter, but the products of the process would not be protected by the patent. The same applies to the splitting up of the product of lysis into 'Isolated DNA'. 5. and 6. are different, depending on what subject matter is claimed. If the process/method is claimed then the resulting cDNA or rDNA would not be protected.

However, if the claimed subject matter is manufacture, or composition of matter then the method of making the matter or creation of the composition of matter is irrelevant. If it were 'manufacture, or composition of matter' then the specific cDNA or rDNA manufactured or composed in the claims would have to be new and useful. I could see that being the case for medical treatment. However, every instance of cDNA or rDNA would not be included in the patent protection because they are not all equally novel or useful or claimed.

I look forward to the Supremes opinion. They are usually very good at opinions giving this depth of detail.

---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid!

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )