United States: Patent Eligibility In The Life Sciences: Supreme Court Declines Review Of Ariosa Diagnostics v. Sequenom

On June 27, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc.,1 thereby letting stand the Federal Circuit's June 2015 ruling that Sequenom's diagnostic test for prenatal DNA is not patent eligible. In Ariosa, the Federal Circuit found that the claims, which were recognized to be directed to a groundbreaking discovery, are not entitled to patent protection because the presence of prenatal DNA in a maternal sample is a natural phenomenon.

The decision to decline review of patent eligible subject matter in the diagnostic and life science areas may reinforce the courts' increased scrutiny of life science claims after recent Supreme Court decisions including Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012).

As a result, this decision represents a welcomed victory for defendants seeking to challenge method claims asserted against them as being patent ineligible. For companies seeking patent claims to diagnostic methods, biomarker detection, and other life science-based technologies, however, the decision may lead to continuing uncertainties regarding the validity or patentability of numerous patents or applications in this area. While this uncertainty may be concerning to these companies, dicta by the Supreme Court in its Mayo decision and recent guidelines issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)2 offer some hope that certain subject matter may remain patent eligible in this area.


Subject matter eligibility is governed by 35 U.S.C. §101 and extends patent protection to "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof." There are, however, judicially created exceptions, including laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas, which are not eligible for patent protection.3 Nonetheless, the bar for patent eligibility has, historically, been relatively low. That is, until the past few years.

The scope of what constitutes patent ineligible subject matter has increased following the Supreme Court's decision in Mayo, which held that a method of correlating effectiveness of treatment to a natural metabolite of an administered drug is a law of nature, and, therefore, not patent eligible.

Mayo provided a two-part framework for determining whether an invention is patent eligible subject matter.4 The framework first assesses the claims to determine if they are directed to a patent ineligible concept (i.e., a law of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract idea). If they are, then the claims are not patent eligible unless the claim as a whole is directed to "significantly more" than the law of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract idea itself.

As technologies are now being evaluated, or reevaluated, in the post-Mayo world, a new question arises: "Is this still patent eligible subject matter under the Mayo framework?" Some claims that would have been patent eligible just a few years ago may no longer be eligible for patent protection today in view of the more stringent standards for patent eligibility in Mayo and other court decisions.


Sequenom was granted a patent to a method of non-invasively measuring cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal plasma and serum. The inventors discovered that cffDNA, which originated with the fetus but circulates freely in mother's bloodstream, could be isolated, amplified, and detected as an alternative to the more invasive prenatal diagnostic techniques.5 After being sued for infringement by Sequenom, Ariosa challenged the patent as being invalid for being directed to a patent ineligible natural phenomenon.

The district court applied the Mayo two-part test and concluded that the diagnostic methods were patent ineligible, since the claims were directed to a natural phenomenon, the cffDNA, and the remaining steps were "well-understood, routine, and conventional" in the field.

On appeal to the Federal Circuit, Sequenom argued that "the claimed methods are patent eligible applications of a natural phenomenon, specifically a method for detecting paternally inherited cffDNA."6 In support of patent eligibility, Sequenom argued that "before the '540 patent, no one was using the plasma or serum of pregnant mothers to amplify and detect paternally-inherited cffDNA."7 Nonetheless, the Federal Circuit reasoned that, in view of the "sweeping language"8 of Mayo, it was obligated to affirm the district court's ruling that the claimed methods were not eligible for patent protection.9 Under the guidelines of Mayo, the court found that the cffDNA constituted a "natural phenomenon" (Mayo step 1) and the remaining steps of amplifying and detecting the cffDNA were "well-understood, routine, and conventional activity" (Mayo step 2).10

The court held 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 themselves are conventional, routine and well understood applications in the art."11

Judge Linn authored a concurring opinion that evinced the reluctance of at least some judges of the Federal Circuit to invalidate Sequenom's claims as being patent ineligible. Judge Linn noted, "[t]his case represents the consequence—perhaps unintended—of that broad language [in Mayo] in excluding a meritorious invention from the patent protection it deserves and should have been entitled to retain."12 This criticism of the potential reach of the Mayo decision offered hope that the issue was ripe for review by the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, by declining certiorari, the Supreme Court may be reinforcing the broad-sweeping impact of the Mayo framework.


Because the Supreme Court has declined to review the issue of patent eligibility at this time, the Mayo framework will likely be the test for patent eligibility for the foreseeable future. So far, courts have provided little guidance in the life sciences arena as to what additional elements must be present for a claim to be directed to "significantly more" than the judicial exception. Nevertheless, there is no categorical exclusion of subject matter eligibility in this area, since even the Supreme Court in Mayo stated that "too broad an interpretation of this exclusionary principle could eviscerate patent law"13 and that "an application of a law of nature...to a known structure or process may well be deserving of patent protection."14

Without further guidance from the Supreme Court, the lower courts will likely continue to invalidate certain patent claims. For example, on April 8, 2016, the Federal Circuit in Genetic Techs. Ltd. v. Merial L.L.C., 818 F.3d 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2016) struck down claims directed to "methods of detecting a coding region allele by amplifying and analyzing any linked non-coding region" for failing to satisfy patent eligibility under Mayo. As in Ariosa, the court concluded that the exception at issue (here, a "law of nature") was applied using only the conventional and routine steps of amplifying and detecting the DNA.


The impact that the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in Ariosa will have is unclear. While the Court decided not to revisit the Mayo framework at this time, it does not foreclose the possibility that the Court will revisit it in the future. Nonetheless, it appears that, at least for now, the lower courts will continue to invalidate life sciences-related method claims. If the Court does not take up this issue in the future, the current test for patent eligibility under Mayo will remain the law unless Congress steps in—An event that seems unlikely to occur soon.

In the meantime, clients pursuing intellectual property protection for certain method claims in the life sciences will want to work closely with their patent counsel to address the impact of these recent decisions on their businesses and patent estates, while defendants in cases may want to consider how these cases might apply to claims asserted against them.


1 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

2 May 2016 Subject Matter Eligibility Update, 88 Fed. Reg. 27381 (May 6, 2016).

3 See Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 309 (1980). 4 Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1293–94.

4 Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1293–94.

5 Id.

6 Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., Nos. 2014-1139, 2014-1144, slip op. at *11 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (emphasis added).

7 Id. at *15 (citing Appellants' Br. 49).

8 Id. at *4 (Linn, J., concurring).

9 Id. at *16 (majority).

10 Id. at *13.

11 Id. 12 Id. at *2 (Linn, J., concurring).

12 Id. at *2 (Linn, J., concurring).

13 Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1293 (2012).

14 Id. at 1293-94 (quoting Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187 (1981)).

Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved

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.

Karen G. Potter
James J. Mullen III, Ph.D.
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
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
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions