Tag Archives: Genetic Test

Study Advances Personalized Medicine for Newborns

Earlier this year, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) issued recommendations and proposed best practices for genetic testing and screening of infants and children. In Ethical and Policy Issues in Genetic Testing and Screening of Children, the AAP and ACMG reviewed the scenarios in which genetic … Continue reading this entry

Video Interview: Discussing the Supreme Court's Oral Arguments in Myriad Gene Patenting Case

Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to speak again with Colin O’Keefe of LXBN regarding last week’s oral arguments in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics. In the interview, I share some quick observations on the oral arguments and offer my thoughts why I believe the Justices will “split the baby” with their ruling.… Continue reading this entry

Preparing to Comply With the HITECH Final Rule

As reported in my January 24th, 2013 post, the Office for Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued an omnibus final rule (the Rule) implementing changes in current regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), pursuant to the Health Information Technology for Economic and … Continue reading this entry

Genetic Testing and Screening of Children: Ethics and Best Practices

The application of medical technology in the pediatric setting must serve the best interest of the child. Genetic testing of children and infants presents unique challenges. In contrast to the testing of adult patients, most children cannot understand the risks and benefits or provide informed consent. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Medical Genetics and … Continue reading this entry

China Issues Human Genetic Resources Management Regulations

Those seeking to conduct research involving human genetic material within the People’s Republic of China or to import into China such material should review China’s recently issued draft regulations (“Draft”) for the management of its human genetic resources. The regulations apply to the collection, preservation, research, development, immigration and other activities involving human genetic material. The Draft … Continue reading this entry

Status Update on the Genetic Testing Study

The U.S. Patent Office recently announced that it will not be delivering its report on Genetic Testing as required under Section 27 of the America Invents Act (“AIA”)  by the June 16, 2012 deadline.… Continue reading this entry

Patent-Eligibility of Diagnostic Patents Reconsidered in Canada

The Canadian Patent Office released today practice guidelines regarding the patent-eligibility of medical diagnostic methods and medical methods. The practice guidance are in effect immediately and until further notice, and in place of any contrary guidance presently in the Canadian Manual of Patent Office Practice (MOPOP, the Canadian equivalent to the US MPEP, setting forth … Continue reading this entry

Video Interview: Discussing Mayo v. Prometheus With LXBN TV

The other day I had the opportunity to speak with Colin O’Keefe of LXBN TV on the subject of Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. In the short interview, I explain the background of the case, offer my thoughts on why Prometheus’ patent wouldn’t have a detrimental impact on medical research and give my thoughts … Continue reading this entry

Presidential Commission to Study Management of, and Access to, Human Genome Sequencing Data

On November 24, 2009, President Obama established the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (Commission) to advise him on bioethical issues generated by novel and emerging research in biomedical and related areas of science and technology. As part of this initiative, the Commission issued a Notice on March 27, 2012 (Federal Register) seeking comments … Continue reading this entry

Gene Patenting Case Heads Back to Federal Circuit

The U.S. Supreme Court has sent the ACLU “gene patenting” case back to the Federal Circuit for reconsideration in light of its unanimous decision in  Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., No. 10-1150 (S. Ct. 2012). For a review of the issues, please see Foley & Lardner’s client alert “Supreme Court Tells Federal Circuit to … Continue reading this entry

Personalized Medicine Market Growing Amid Challenges

On the same day that the personalized medicine testing market was reported to have exceeded $28 billion in 2011, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) also reported a perceived stumble to the use of genomic tests that serve personalized medicine.… Continue reading this entry

Gene Patenting Debate Slips Into Patent Reform Bill

On June 23, 2011, the United States House of Representatives passed the “Leahy-Smith America Invents Act” (H.R. 1249) to amend title 35 of the United States Code, to provide for patent reform.  Within the numerous provisions related to the examination, administration and enforcement of U.S. patents is a proposed amendment that may affect the value … Continue reading this entry

Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic Method Claims - What Have Courts Considered So Far?

Even for patent attorneys who specialize in personalized medicine, confusion still exists as to the best way to pursue and enforce diagnostic method patent claims in light of patent eligibility considerations under 35 U.S.C. §101.  While the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have provided some guidance regarding patent eligibility of certain method claims, details of … Continue reading this entry

Diagnostic Method Claims Invalid for Lack of Written Description and Anticipation

In Billups-Rothenberg, Inc. v. Associated Regional and University Pathologists, Inc. (ARUP) and Bio-Rad Labs., Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court summary judgment that diagnostic method claims in two patents were invalid as either failing the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. §112, or being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. §102 by a patent owned … Continue reading this entry