In The U.S. Supreme Court SEQUENOM v. ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, available at: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/32880-pdf-Dhuey.pdf: BRIEF OF TIMO MINSSEN & ROBERT M. SCHWARTZ WITH 10 EUROPEAN & AUSTRALIAN LAW PROFESSORS AS AMICI CURIAE

TY - GEN

T1 - In The U.S. Supreme Court SEQUENOM v. ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, available at: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/32880-pdf-Dhuey.pdf

T2 - BRIEF OF TIMO MINSSEN & ROBERT M. SCHWARTZ WITH 10 EUROPEAN & AUSTRALIAN LAW PROFESSORS AS AMICI CURIAE

AU - Minssen, Timo

AU - Schwartz, Robert M.

N1 - US Supreme Court, Docket No. 15-1182

PY - 2016/4/20

Y1 - 2016/4/20

N2 - Sequenom’s patentable subject matter test introduced a rigid, atomistic approach to claims eligibility that would result in an unsound change to US patent policy, which has encouraged the global convergence of patent standards for over twenty years. The Sequenom 35 U.S.C. § 101 test conflicts with the holistic, harmonized European approach to excepted or excluded subject matter. As applied, it arguably contradicts international treaties to which the US is a party, and upon which the European Patent Convention’s patentability exceptions and exclusions are based. Global fragmentation of patent standards threatens efficiencies of scale and destabilizes those policies. This case supplies a compelling vehicle to clarify the patent eligibility tests enunciated in this Court’s recent case law since the patent claims’ scope were forensically construed in a Markman proceeding.

AB - Sequenom’s patentable subject matter test introduced a rigid, atomistic approach to claims eligibility that would result in an unsound change to US patent policy, which has encouraged the global convergence of patent standards for over twenty years. The Sequenom 35 U.S.C. § 101 test conflicts with the holistic, harmonized European approach to excepted or excluded subject matter. As applied, it arguably contradicts international treaties to which the US is a party, and upon which the European Patent Convention’s patentability exceptions and exclusions are based. Global fragmentation of patent standards threatens efficiencies of scale and destabilizes those policies. This case supplies a compelling vehicle to clarify the patent eligibility tests enunciated in this Court’s recent case law since the patent claims’ scope were forensically construed in a Markman proceeding.

M3 - Other contribution

ER -