|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-1182||Fed. Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 15|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioners in this case.
Issue: Whether a novel method is patent-eligible where: (1) a researcher is the first to discover a natural phenomenon; (2) that unique knowledge motivates him to apply a new combination of known techniques to that discovery; and (3) he thereby achieves a previously impossible result without preempting other uses of the discovery.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 18 2016||Application (15A871) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from March 1, 2016 to April 1, 2016, submitted to The Chief Justice.|
|Feb 22 2016||Application (15A871) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until April 1, 2016.|
|Mar 21 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 20, 2016)|
|Mar 28 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for petitioner.|
|Mar 28 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. ("Ariosa").|
|Mar 30 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent DNA Diagnostics Center, Inc.("DDC").|
|Mar 31 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondent Natera, Inc..|
|Mar 31 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 20, 2016, for all respondents.|
|Apr 1 2016||Brief amici curiae of Eli Lilly and Company, et al. filed.|
|Apr 15 2016||Brief amicus curiae of The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys filed.|
|Apr 18 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed.|
|Apr 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Dr. Ananda Mohan Chakrabarty filed.|
|Apr 19 2016||Brief amici curiae of BioIndustry Association, et al. filed.|
|Apr 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Metabolon, Inc. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Coalition for 21st Century Medicine filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Novartis AG filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Microsoft Corporation filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Professor Jeffrey A. Lefstin, et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Murgitroyd & Company filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Biotechnology Innovation Organization, et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Amarantus Bioscience Holdings, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Population Diagnostics, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of JYANT Technologies, Inc. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of 19 Law Professors filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Professor Timo Minssen, et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Institute of Professional Representatives before the European Patent Office filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Federal Circuit Bar Association filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amici curiae of Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, et al. filed.|
|Apr 20 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Boston Patent Law Association filed.|
|May 20 2016||Brief of respondents Natera, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|May 20 2016||Brief of respondent Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. in opposition filed.|
|Jun 6 2016||Reply of petitioner Sequenom, Inc. filed.|
|Jun 7 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 23, 2016.|
|Jun 27 2016||Petition DENIED.|
Having covered the Supreme Court for six decades, @lylden has seen a lot of changes at 1 First Street. In the latest piece in our series on the post-COVID court, Lyle examines how the court's pandemic operations could spur permanent reform.
How has COVID-19 changed the Supreme Court? And are any of those changes worth keeping? Today we launch a symposium examining those questions.
First up, a piece from @stevenmazie on how to reform oral arguments after the pandemic.
The court after COVID: A recipe for oral argument reform - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court has not yet announced whether it will return to normal operations when the 2021-22 term begins ...
NEW shadow-docket case: New York landlords ask SCOTUS for an emergency order to prevent the state from continuing to enforce its COVID-related eviction moratorium. They say the moratorium "runs roughshod" over their constitutional rights.
Filing here: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A8-1.pdf
New on the shadow docket: Florida seeks an emergency order blocking CDC policies that substantially limit cruise ships from sailing.
Florida asks #SCOTUS to block, pending appeal, CDC restrictions imposed on cruise industry b/c of COVID-19 pandemic: https://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/21A5.pdf
NEW: Mississippi formally asks the Supreme Court to overturn its landmark abortion case, Roe v. Wade, in latest court filing. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-1392/184703/20210722161332385_19-1392BriefForPetitioners.pdf
Biden’s SCOTUS reform commission met yesterday and discussed several reform ideas including adding justices and adopting a formal code of ethics.
Term limits emerged as a popular idea. But how to implement it — via statute or constitutional amendment?
Term limits emerge as popular proposal at latest meeting of court-reform commission - SCOTUSblog
The Presidential Commission on the Supreme Court reconvened on Tuesday to hear from a new set of experts on vari...
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.