The US Supreme Court in Mayo v. Prometheus - Taking the fire from or to biotechnology and personalized medicine? Supreme Court of the United States, Mayo Collaborative Services, dba Mayo Medical Laboratories, et al., Petitioners v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc ., 132 S.Ct. 1289
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review › Research › peer-review
Standard
The US Supreme Court in Mayo v. Prometheus - Taking the fire from or to biotechnology and personalized medicine? Supreme Court of the United States, Mayo Collaborative Services, dba Mayo Medical Laboratories, et al., Petitioners v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc ., 132 S.Ct. 1289. / Minssen, Timo; Nilsson, David.
In: Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2012, p. 376-388.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The US Supreme Court in Mayo v. Prometheus - Taking the fire from or to biotechnology and personalized medicine?
T2 - Supreme Court of the United States, Mayo Collaborative Services, dba Mayo Medical Laboratories, et al., Petitioners v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc ., 132 S.Ct. 1289
AU - Minssen, Timo
AU - Nilsson, David
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - On 20 March 2012, the US Supreme Court handed down its much awaited patent eligibility- ruling in the dispute between Prometheus Laboratories Inc (“Prometheus”), acting as plaintiffs, and Mayo Medical Laboratories (“Mayo”), as alleged infringers of Prometheus’ licensed patents. This case review will first briefly describe the background to the case and the patents at issue (1), the procedural history (2), and the judgment of the Supreme Court (3). This is followed by a brief discussion of the decision’s actual and potential implications for the patentability of biomedical methods and products including some comparative European views (4). The paper concludes with general remarks (5).
AB - On 20 March 2012, the US Supreme Court handed down its much awaited patent eligibility- ruling in the dispute between Prometheus Laboratories Inc (“Prometheus”), acting as plaintiffs, and Mayo Medical Laboratories (“Mayo”), as alleged infringers of Prometheus’ licensed patents. This case review will first briefly describe the background to the case and the patents at issue (1), the procedural history (2), and the judgment of the Supreme Court (3). This is followed by a brief discussion of the decision’s actual and potential implications for the patentability of biomedical methods and products including some comparative European views (4). The paper concludes with general remarks (5).
U2 - 10.4337/qmjip.2012.04.05
DO - 10.4337/qmjip.2012.04.05
M3 - Review
VL - 2
SP - 376
EP - 388
JO - Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property
JF - Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property
SN - 2045-9807
IS - 4
ER -
ID: 38374908