Nestle Loses Patent Case That Could Have Stifled IVD Development

Posted 20 March 2012 By Alexander Gaffney

The Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) ruled 20 March that Prometheus Laboratories, a subsidiary of Nestle, could not patent a method to determine the proper dosing for a disease, reports Reuters.

The highly-watched court case overturned an earlier-and controversial-decision allowing Prometheus to patent adequate dosing methods. Critics contended Prometheus was patenting observational science itself, preventing physicians from treating their patients, developing new therapies or developing new in vitro diagnostic products.

SCOTUS' ruling gives a final answer to the Mayo Clinic, which initiated legal proceedings against Prometheus.

"We conclude that the patent claims at issue here effectively claim the underlying laws of nature themselves, wrote Justice Stephen Breyer. "The claims are consequently invalid."


Read more:

Reuters - Supreme court rules against Nestle unit on patent

Share this article:

Tags: Mayo Clinic, Mayo, Breyer, Prometheus, Nestle, Justice, Court, SCOTUS, Latest News, Supreme Court

Regulatory Exchange: Latest Updates From the Community