Dehns, Patent and Trademark Attorneys, 59 St Aldates, Oxford OX1 1ST, UK.
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2011 Mar;11(2):149-58. doi: 10.1586/erm.10.108.
In a recent decision (AMP v. USPTO) from the US District Court, patent claims directed at DNA sequences corresponding to human genes and to diagnostic tests based on such genes have been found to be invalid, primarily on the basis that the DNA molecules claimed, which included cDNA, primers and probes, are 'products of nature' and are thus unpatentable. If upheld, this decision will have considerable impact on the ability of biotechnical companies and universities to patent the results of their research. In this article, we will explain the basis for this decision and discuss the appropriateness of patenting discoveries and their (obvious) uses in the light of this fascinating case. While our focus will primarily be on the product claims, diagnostic method claims were also revoked in AMP v. USPTO on the basis that they were for mental acts or did not involve any 'transformation of matter'. This will be discussed in the light of the recent US Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Kappos, which focused on the patent-eligibility of process claims.
在最近美国地区法院的一项裁决(AMP 诉 USPTO)中,针对与人类基因相对应的 DNA 序列和基于这些基因的诊断测试的专利主张被发现无效,主要依据是所主张的 DNA 分子,包括 cDNA、引物和探针,是“自然产物”,因此不可授予专利。如果这一裁决得到维持,这将对生物技术公司和大学将其研究成果申请专利的能力产生重大影响。在本文中,我们将解释这一裁决的依据,并根据这一引人入胜的案例,讨论发现专利的适当性及其(明显)用途。虽然我们的重点主要是产品主张,但在 AMP 诉 USPTO 中,诊断方法主张也被撤销,理由是它们是精神行为,或者不涉及任何“物质转化”。这将根据美国最高法院最近在 Bilski v. Kappos 案中的裁决进行讨论,该案的重点是程序主张的可专利性。