Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal
Abstract
The note examines the inconsistent application of the patent eligibility framework under Section 101 of the Patent Act, particularly in biotechnology. It argues that despite efforts by the USPTO to clarify the framework through memos and examples, courts have applied it inconsistently, leading to discrimination against biotechnology products. The analysis focuses on key Supreme Court decisions, such as Myriad Genetics and Mayo, and their impact on the patent eligibility of biotechnological innovations. The note highlights the need for clearer guidance to ensure consistent outcomes and fair treatment of biotechnological inventions.
Disciplines
Constitutional Law | Food and Drug Law | Intellectual Property Law | Law | Legislation | Medical Jurisprudence | Science and Technology Law
Recommended Citation
Skye Cho,
The Current Application of the Myriad and Mayo/Alice Rulings on Patent Eligibility: Inconsistent Results and Contradistinguishing Biotechnology Products,
38
Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J.
183
(2020).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/cardozoaelj/vol38/iss1/8
Included in
Constitutional Law Commons, Food and Drug Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Legislation Commons, Medical Jurisprudence Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons