Mayo Argument Commenters Expect Same Broad Section 101, But With More Guidance

Attorneys and stakeholders reviewing oral arguments in the Mayo case predict broad Section 101 to continue, but are cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will provide more guidance on preemption, as well as separate novelty and nonobviousness analyses. Finnegan partner Denise DeFranco takes the middle ground between those who saw a change in the Court's view and those who saw a continued overemphasis on issues outside Section 101. She said that she was “worried so many of the justices seemed interested in putting Section 102 and 103 concerns into 101…but [was] optimistic that the Court will continue to see these types of claims as patent eligible.”