Kevin Noonan, Biotech Patent Lawyer, MBHB
0:00 Why did Sequenom think they had a chance with the Supreme Court after Myriad and Mayo?
7:04 A history of hesitant judges
10:16 What does this mean for new Dx patents?
14:55 A horrible outcome
It’s a non-decision with big implications. On Monday, the Supreme Court turned down an appeal by Sequenom in their patent case with Ariosa. The rebuff by the highest court kills Sequenom’s prenatal screening test patent for good.
Sequenom was first to market with their prenatal test that screened for chromosomal abnormalities, such as Trisomy 21. And there was nothing unusual in Sequenom’s receiving patent No. 6,258,540 for the test based on a novel discovery by researcher Dennis Lo showing that there was fetal DNA in the mother’s blood. The discovery sparked one of the fastest growing fields in the history of diagnostics.
The final result on this case has many in the field scratching their heads. If Sequenom can’t defend their patent for such a novel test, then what route should diagnostics companies take to protect their IP?
Today we’re joined by Kevin Noonan, a well known biotech patent lawyer and regular Mendelspod contributor, to discuss the case and what it means for our industry.
Kevin points out that in the precedent setting case of Mayo, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the case would end the patenting of many diagnostics, but expressly urged Congress to act and give the patent office more clarification. Until they do, Kevin says, companies are left with the only option of “hiding their technology” in order to get a return on their investment.
“We have this great age of personalized medicine that we’ve been hearing about since the Human Genome Project, which could die on the vine,” he says. "As a business person, you’re not gonna go into that business, you’re going to invest in the next “i” something because that you can protect. As a policy matter, it’s a horrible outcome."