SUPREEM COURT RULING (GENE PATENTING - HUMANS) (PDF) LINK BELOW👇!

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER TERM, 2012 1
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.

Syllabus
ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY ET AL.
v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
No. 12–398. Argued April 15, 2013—Decided June 13, 2013
Each human gene is encoded as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which
takes the shape of a “double helix.” Each “cross-bar” in that helix
consists of two chemically joined nucleotides. Sequences of DNA nucleotides
contain the information necessary to create strings of amino
acids used to build proteins in the body. The nucleotides that code
for amino acids are “exons,” and those that do not are “introns.” Scientists
can extract DNA from cells to isolate specific segments for
study. They can also synthetically create exons-only strands of nucleotides
known as complementary DNA (cDNA). cDNA contains only the
exons that occur in DNA, omitting the intervening introns.
Respondent Myriad Genetics, Inc. (Myriad), obtained several patents
after discovering the precise location and sequence of the
BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, mutations of which can dramatically increase
the risk of breast and ovarian cancer. This knowledge allowed
Myriad to determine the genes’ typical nucleotide sequence, which, in
turn, enabled it to develop medical tests useful for detecting mutations
in these genes in a particular patient to assess the patient’s
cancer risk. If valid, Myriad’s patents would give it the exclusive
right to isolate an individual’s BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and would
give Myriad the exclusive right to synthetically create BRCA cDNA.
Petitioners filed suit, seeking a declaration that Myriad’s patents are
invalid under 35 U. S. C. §101. As relevant here, the District Court
granted summary judgment to petitioners, concluding that Myriad’s
claims were invalid because they covered products of nature. The
Federal Circuit initially reversed, but on remand in light of Mayo
Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 566 U. S. ___,
the Circuit found both isolated DNA and cDNA patent eligible.
www.supremecourt.gov%2Fopinions%2F12pdf%2F12-398_1b7d.pdf&h=AT0vyo3qICITbEBe2bzaFxpnVbyOcCSyMV5gU1WbXPz1TER22jpznVo03S0esB9zVqtcISNvMnBPzIsXywHWZ1LPR-r3mcfBD2ySJy6M6XaLkhKHO37DtizsIFu8gXUMLzhwi62s27NDOp4&d=m