High Court Must Review Sequenom Test Decision, Attorneys Say

On March 21, 2016, Sequenom Inc. asked the Supreme Court to review the Federal Circuit's decision to invalidate claims directed to methods for detecting paternally inherited cell-free fetal DNA in a mother’s blood—a decision that has had a major impact on the life sciences industry. The Federal Circuit's decision in Sequenom relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Mayo, a ruling that many practitioners believe warrants clarification. Many practitioners also believe that the Federal Circuit's decision in Sequenom should lead companies to consider trade secret protection rather than relying on patents and/or to lobby Congress to clarify patent law. Bloomberg BNA contacted Finnegan attorney Howard W. Levine for his thoughts on Sequenom's petition.

Levine said, "If accepted, the cert. petition will provide the Supreme Court with the opportunity to reconsider its decision in Mayo and explain whether the federal courts have correctly interpreted the decision or have taken some of the language of the Mayo opinion that was applicable to a particularized set of facts out of context to create a rigid test that may not be relevant to all situations. Thus, the Supreme Court's decision in this case could have a profound effect on the ability to patent important life sciences inventions, particularly in the diagnostic field and in the burgeoning area of personalized medicine."