The US Supreme Court in Mayo v Prometheus – taking the fire from or to biotechnology and personalized medicine?
  • 1 Assistant Professor LLM, MIL, Centre for Information & Innovation Law (CIIR), Copenhagen University, Denmark
  • | 2 Advokat, LLM, Associate, Bird & Bird, Stockholm, Sweden

On 20 March 2012, the US Supreme Court handed down its much awaited patent-eligibility ruling in the dispute between Prometheus Laboratories Inc (‘Prometheus’), acting as plaintiffs, and Mayo Medical Laboratories (‘Mayo’), as alleged infringers of Prometheus' licensed patents. The decision addresses primarily the US patent-eligibility of diagnostic methods and dosage regimes, but it could ultimately also affect the patent-eligibility of isolated or purified biological and chemical compounds. This case review will first briefly describe the background to the case and the patents at issue (section 1), the procedural history (section 2), and the judgment of the Supreme Court (section 3). This is followed by a brief discussion of the decision's actual and potential implications for the patentability of biomedical methods and products including some comparative European views (section 4). The paper concludes with general remarks (section 5).

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.


Pay to Access Content (PDF download and unlimited online access)

Other access options

Redeem Token

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institutional Access

Personal login

Log in with your Elgar Online account

Login with you Elgar account