21 July 2016AmericasStephen Stout and Rachael McClure
Ariosa v Sequenom: keeping the Mayo test in place
On June 27, the US Supreme Court denied a request to revisit the question of patent eligibility for inventions that apply known techniques to newly discovered natural phenomena in Sequenom v. Ariosa Diagnostics. In light of the denial, the high court’s test for patent eligibility will remain unaltered from its 2012 decision in Mayo v Prometheus. The decision to deny certiorari leaves the patent eligibilty of many life sciences-related patent claims, and in particular, those directed to diagnostic tools, in jeopardy, even if they “combine[] and utilize[] man-made tools of biotechnology in a new way that revolutionize[s]” the field (Ariosa).
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk
24 December 2025 John Squires has rewired the country’s patents system since becoming USPTO director—but which changes are most impactful? Sarah Speight explores.
22 December 2025 Biopharma company and two others have taken action against numerous defendants over proposed generic versions of Livmarli, Mirum’s core revenue driver.
17 December 2025 The proponents of a petition denied by the Supreme Court said it addressed a conflict that was significant “not just for the pharmaceutical industry, but for all stakeholders in our patent system”.