The Supreme Courts most recent patent law decision, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs Inc., limits the scope of the intellectual subject matter that is eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101. As a result, Prometheus has not been warmly received by the patent bar. For example, the case has been the subject of a five-part-tirade guest post on the prominent patent law blog Patently O.
Many in the field have argued that the Supreme Courts opinion gives as much guidance as the courts I know it when I see it obscenity jurisprudence. While we would admit that Prometheus is not as coldly analytical as most patent lawyers are used to, we think it provides fresh insights into the jurisprudence of patent law and ample guidance for lower courts and practitioners.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
