United States: Federal Circuit Decision In Ariosa v. Sequenom Offers Further Clarification On The Scope Of Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

On June 12, 2015, the Federal Circuit issued its eagerly anticipated decision in Ariosa v. Sequenom,1 which assessed the subject matter eligibility of claims directed to a diagnostic method under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The case involved U.S. Patent No. 6,258,540 ("the '540 patent") directed to methods of non-invasively measuring cell-free fetal DNA ("cffDNA") in maternal plasma and serum. Despite the discovery of unique diagnostic benefits in what had formerly been considered waste material, the court affirmed the invalidity of the asserted claims of the '540 patent, explaining that "[w]here claims of a method patent are directed to an application that starts and ends with a naturally occurring phenomenon, the patent fails to disclose patent-eligible subject matter if the methods [used to measure a sample] themselves are conventional, routine and well understood applications in the art."2 Ariosa repeats the Supreme Court's caution that "[g]roundbreaking, innovative, or even brilliant discovery does not by itself satisfy the § 101 inquiry."3 The decision adds to a spate of recent cases marking a shift in the law on patentable subject matter, a trend that started with the Supreme Court decisions in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.,4 and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.,5 and continued more recently in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International.6 Here, we examine post-Alice USPTO guidance and case law addressing the subject matter eligibility of natural products and phenomena.

Shortly after Alice was decided, the USPTO issued a revised Guidance to examiners addressing patent subject matter eligibility.7 The Office emphasized the two-step analysis of Alice, requiring examiners to determine if a claim is "directed to" a natural law or product of nature by looking for "markedly different characteristics," and if no such marked difference is identified, to assess whether the claim recites additional elements that amount to "significantly more" than the judicial exception. The Guidance requires examiners to apply this analysis to all claims (product and process) that contain a judicial exception. The Office acknowledged the possibility that a marked difference could be shown by structure, function, or "other pertinent properties." And the Office emphasized that claims that clearly do not seek to "tie up" a judicial exception and preempt others from using it should be subject to a "streamlined" eligibility analysis. Various hypothetical examples were provided by the Office, including examples of patent-eligible subject matter. For example, the Guidance indicates that certain combinations of natural products and methods of treatment should be considered patent-eligible subject matter. District courts have begun to take note of the revised Guidance, citing it as persuasive reasoning when assessing the patent eligibility of challenged claims.8

One day after the USPTO issued its revised Guidance, the Federal Circuit addressed the patent eligibility of natural products and correlations in Myriad Genetics, Inc. v. Ambry Genetics Corp ("Ambry").9 That case, an appeal of a district court's denial of a preliminary injunction, involved a series of previously unasserted claims from the BRCA1 and BRCA2 patents at issue in the earlier Myriad Supreme Court decision. The asserted claims related to, inter alia, nucleotide primers for amplifying the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, as well as methods of diagnosing breast cancer by comparing a patient's BRCA genotype against a wild-type sequence. In Ambry, the court held that neither the primer claims nor the method claims were patent eligible.

Addressing the primer claims, the court concluded that the "primers before us are not distinguishable from the isolated DNA found patent-ineligible in Myriad and are not similar to the cDNA found to be patent-eligible."10 The court stated that the primer nucleotide sequences were identical to those of naturally occurring DNA, and further that the intended use of the primers mimicked the natural DNA function of base pairing with complementary sequences.11 Nor did the single-stranded nature of the primers render them patent eligible. Rather, the court analogized the preparation of single-stranded primers to the ineligible act of "separating [DNA] from its surrounding genetic material."12 As such, because Myriad's claimed primers shared sequences and base-pairing function with naturally occurring nucleic acids, they were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter.

In addressing the method claims, the Ambry court applied the two-step analysis outlined in Alice: (1) determine whether a claim is directed to a patent-ineligible concept such as a product of nature, natural law, or abstract idea, and if so, (2) determine whether the remaining elements of the claim, alone or in combination, are sufficient to transform the claim into a patent-eligible application. The court explained that the method claims at issue were directed to "a patent-ineligible abstract idea of comparing . . . and determining the existence of alterations."13 The court then conducted the second part of the two-step test and found the "non-patent-ineligible elements" insufficient to support patentability.14 Rather, the physical interventions required by the claims — such as hybridizing gene probes, amplifying the BRCA1 and BRCA2 loci, and sequencing those loci — were seen by the Court as "well-understood, routine and conventional activity engaged in by scientists at the time of Myriad's patent applications," not least because Myriad's own specification indicated that routine methods known to those of skill in the art could be used to detect and sequence the loci.15 Thus, when assessed "as a whole," the Court found that the asserted method claims were insufficient to rise to the level of patent-eligible subject matter.16 Although not before the court, Myriad's patent also contained narrower claims to determining a risk of breast cancer by detecting mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes selected from a list of particular mutations reported in the specification. In dicta, the Federal Circuit suggested that these claims might be "qualitatively different from the [invalid] method claims at issue."17

Following Ambry, five district court cases have (to date) relied on the decision. In only one of those five cases, Ameritox, Ltd. v. Millennium Health, LLC, has a district court found a claim to a natural product or diagnostic method patent eligible.18 That case involved a claimed method of measuring metabolite levels in a patient's urine and comparing them to creatinine levels.

In the recent Ariosa decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgment issued by Judge Illston of the Northern District of California. The district court had held the claims of the '540 patent invalid. Claim 1 of the '540 patent, directed to a method of measuring cffDNA in maternal plasma or serum, states:

1. A method for detecting a paternally inherited nucleic acid of fetal origin performed on a maternal serum or plasma sample from a pregnant female, which method comprises amplifying a paternally inherited nucleic acid from the serum or plasma sample and detecting the presence of a paternally inherited nucleic acid of fetal origin in the sample.

The court noted that the dependent claims expand on the methods for detecting cffDNA and using the detected cffDNA in prenatal diagnosis.19

Assessing these claims, the court reiterated the two-step analysis required by Mayo and Alice, namely "determin[ing] whether the claims at issue are directed to a patent-ineligible concept" and, if so, "consider[ing] the elements of each claim both individually and 'as an ordered combination' to determine whether additional elements 'transform the nature of the claim' into a patent-eligible application."20 While noting that the '540 patent recites method claims, which are "generally eligible subject matter," the court went on to point out that the claimed method "begins and ends with a natural phenomenon," i.e., the presence of cffDNA in maternal blood and the diagnostic implications that can be made by correlating that cffDNA with paternally inherited nucleic acid.21 Thus, the court concluded that the claims of the '540 patent satisfy the first step of the analysis laid out in Alice because they are "directed to matter that is naturally occurring."22

The Court next evaluated the second step of the analysis to determine whether the remaining elements of the claims in the '540 patent "transform" the natural phenomenon into a patent-eligible application.23 Despite the presence of claims to particular methods for amplifying, detecting, and correlating cffDNA with paternally inherited nucleic acid, the Court concluded that the claims were insufficient to integrate the naturally occurring material into a patent-eligible application. Rather, the specific methods recited in the claims were considered "routine and conventional," particularly in light of the guidance in the specification indicating that amplification, detection, and correlation could be done using "standard techniques."24 The decision then concluded by reiterating the Supreme Court guidance from Mayo that "appending routine, conventional steps to a natural phenomenon, specified at a high level of generality, is not enough to supply an inventive concept. Where claims of a method patent are directed to an application that starts and ends with a naturally occurring phenomenon, the patent fails to disclose patent eligible subject matter if the methods themselves are conventional, routine and well understood applications in the art."25 As such, the Federal Circuit found the claims of the ′540 patent at issue on appeal invalid.

The Federal Circuit next rejected Sequenom's argument that the '540 patent claims were patent eligible because they did not preempt all uses of cffDNA.26 The court explained that "[w]hile preemption may signal patent ineligible subject matter, the absence of complete preemption does not demonstrate patent eligibility."27 The court further noted that "[w]here a patent's claims are deemed only to disclose patent ineligible subject matter under the Mayo framework, as they are in this case, preemption concerns are fully addressed and made moot."28

Additional litigation will undoubtedly be required to further delineate the shifting standard for assessing patentable subject matter in view of Ariosa and Ambry. Interested stakeholders should continue to monitor the space, including whether either of these decisions will be subject to additional en banc review by the Federal Circuit or review by the United States Supreme Court.

Footnotes

1 Nos. 2014–1139, 2014–1144.

2 Id. at 6.

3 Ariosa, slip op. at 16 (citing Myriad, 133 S. Ct. at 2117).

4 132 S.Ct. 1289 (2012).

5 133 S.Ct. 2107, 2117 (2013).

6 134 S.Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014).

7 2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, 79 Fed. Reg. 74,618 (Dec. 16, 2014).

8 See Celsis In Vitro, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc., No. 10 C-4053, 2015 WL 1523818 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 13, 2015); see also TriPlay, Inc. v. WhatsApp Inc., No. 13-1703-LPS, 2015 WL 1927696 (D. Del. Apr. 28, 2015) and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., Nos. 10–1067–LPS and 12–1581–LPS, 2015 WL 1843528 (D. Del. Apr. 22, 2015).
9 774 F.3d 755 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

10 Ambry, 774 F.3d at 760.

11 Id. at 760-761.

12 Id. at 760 (also pointing to the cloned, and therefore genetically identical, sheep held patent ineligible in In re Roslin Institute, 750 F.3d 1333, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2014)).

13 Ambry, 774 F.3d at 763.

14 Id. at 764.

15 Id.

16 Id.

17 Id. at 765.

18 2015 WL 728501, No. 13–cv–832–wmc (W.D. Wis. Feb. 19, 2015).

19 Ariosa, slip op. at 5.

20Id. at 3.

21 Id. at 4.

22 Id.

23 Id.

24Id. at 5.

25 Id. at 6.

26 Id. at 14.

27 Id

28 Id. at 14-15.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Events from this Firm
27 Nov 2017, Seminar, London, UK

Finnegan partner Anthony Tridico will present “U.S. Patent Case Law Update” at the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys’ annual Patent Case Law Review.

28 Nov 2017, Seminar, Milan, Italy

Finnegan partner John Paul will present “Internet of Things: Patent Liability, Enforcement and Licensing” and will join the Mock WIPO Mediation at International Technology Transfer—Licensing and ADR, co-hosted by Licensing Executives Society and World Intellectual Property Organization.

29 Nov 2017, Seminar, Tel Aviv, Israel

Finnegan is a platinum sponsor IVC Research Center’s start-up forum, “The Most Promising Start Ups for 2017 – A Synergy of Big Data, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Vision and IoT.”

 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Emails

From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.