By Robert Dailey --
Just two years ago, the world of patent law (and maybe even Michael Crichton) waited for the Supreme Court to reconsider the standard for patentable subject matter - at least with respect to process claims.
The Supremes had granted cert. on the following question: "Whether a patent instructing a party to 'correlate test results' can validly claim a monopoly over a basic scientific relationship used in medical treatment such that a doctor infringes the patent by looking at a test result and thinking about that relationship?" In other words, could Metabolite Laboratories, Inc. claim a valid patent monopoly over its discovery that high levels of homocysteine in the blood correlate with deficiencies of folic acid and vitamin B12 in humans?
In the end, the Supreme Court punted, and we never got an answer. After all, cert. had been granted on an issue that the defendant, LabCorp, had never properly raised in the District Court litigation.
Last week, though, the District Court confirmed that the injunction that issued after the trial is no longer in force because the patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 4,940,658, has expired. Meanwhile, the litigation continues as the two parties continue to litigate the issue of damages.
Comments