According to a media release by Maurice Blackburn, the High Court has granted Ms D’Arcy special leave to appeal the decision that Myriad’s BRCA patent for isolated genes is patentable subject matter, as a manner of manufacture, in Australia.
At first instance, Nicholas J upheld the patentable subject matter of the patent. His Honour’s decision was affirmed by a Full Bench of the Federal Court.
The transcript of the special leave application is not yet up.
Lid dips: Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick and Dr Summerfield.
D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc.
A Full Bench of the Federal Court of Australia (Allsop CJ, Dowsett, Kenny, Bennett & Middleton JJ) have dismissed the appeal in the Myriad litigation; upholding Nicholas J’s ruling that isolated genes and isolated gene sequences are patentable subject matter in Australia.
Kim Weatherall has pointed out this is a different result to the ruling in the USA but, given the illogicality of the US Supreme Court’s position (e.g. here and here), surely that is no bad thing.
D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc  FCAFC 115
The Full Federal Court has reserved its decision in Research Affiliates’ appeal; the Commissioner’s appeal in RPL Central is still pending.
In the USA, Alice Corp. had a patent for a computerised method of reducing “settlement risk”, a type of escrow arrangement: the 10 judges in the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals came up with 5 different opinions of which Justice Newman memorably said:
[The 5 judgments have] propounded at least three incompatible standards, devoid of consensus, serving simply to add to the unreliability and cost of the system of patents as an incentive for innovation. With today’s judicial deadlock, the only assurance is that any successful innovation is likely to be challenged in opportunistic litigation, whose result will depend on the random selection of the panel.
Now, the US Supreme Court has agreed to try to sort it out.
ALICE CORPORATION PTY. LTD. V. CLS BANK INTERNATIONAL, ET AL., Docket No. 13–298 (Supreme Court 2013) via Patently-O