Article Predicts 8-1 SCOTUS will invalidate the Myriad Patents

The article in WestLawInsider predicts the SCOTUS will invalidate the Myriad patents by and 8-1 decision, with only Justice Alito dissenting:


http://westlawinsider.com/top-legal-news/fantasyscotus-are-human-genes-patentable/?action=rpx_register&rpx_collect=email&rpx_session=rpx_5176deb23ea0d8.56873958&rpx_provider=LinkedIn&redirect_to=http%253A%252F%252Fwestlawinsider.com%252Ftop-legal-news%252Ffantasyscotus-are-human-genes-patentable%252F%2523respond&rpx_username=Arthur%2BGershman&rpx_email=art.gershman%40live.com

Wall Street Journal Article

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324485004578424782830965300.html

Who Owns You?: Other people's bodies: a fresh perspective

Who Owns You?: Other people's bodies: a fresh perspective

The Jewish Daily Forward weighs in

The Jewish Daily Forward, which reports on all thing Jewish  has as article about gene patents in general and the Myriad case as well.  The Forward's Jewish angle is that Jewish ethics clash with gene patenting.  Anne Cohen, the author of the article, interviewed Rabbi David Teutsch, director of the Levin-Lieber Program in Jewish Ethics at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College.  The rabbi said, “How do we provide enough profits to researchers while guaranteeing open access to the results of that research?”  Cohen's interview revealed the rabbi's analysis: "The two goals should be weighed against each other. But ultimately, Teutsch asserted, access to healing should trump private profit".  As the rabbi said: “If a very narrow interpretation of patented property rights is applied here, we’re not going to fulfill the value of maximizing healing. The desire to maximize profits should not be allowed to trump maximizing healing." The article went on to quote Arthur Caplan, perennial academic ethicist, who has apparently moved from U Penn to NYU.
Also quoted were William A. Haseltine, who is a former CEO of Human Genome Sciences, and Rebecca Eisenberg, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, leaving us to wonder, is Hazeltine a Jewish name?

Washington Post Barrage

In what can only be called a barrage, the Washington Post trained its guns on the Myriad case and gene patents.  The shock and awe campaign's opening salvo was an Op Ed piece  titled "Who owns your DNA? Not who you think." in the print edition, and more directly on line as "The Supreme Court should invalidate the patent on human DNA." Jeffrey Rosenfeld and Christopher Mason, holding PhD's from NYU and Yale, respectively, who are professors of genomics at New Jersey and Cornell Medical Schools, respectively. were the authors.  They conclude, "It is imperative that the Supreme Court invalidate Myriad’s patent, defend genomic liberty and make clear that one’s genes belong to that person alone."
Then, in an editorial timed to coincide with the oral arguments in the case on April 15, 2013, the Post fired, "Patents on Human DNA need Congress's input."
The next day, two thirds of A2 rang out with commentary by Dana Milbank and straight reportage by Robert Barnes.  I have only one comment to make, and it's addressed to Dana Milbank: While I agree with your conclusion wholeheartedly, shame on you for making fun of Justice Sotomayor - we need the vote!

Transcript

Myriad Supreme Court Transcript:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-398-amc7.pdf

Interesting Poll:

In anticipation of the Myriad hearing tomorrow the IPO (see pages 69-72 of my book "Other Peoples Bodies.") is having a webinar on the case on Wednesday, April 17.  On the panel will be be our own, Prof. Joshua Sarnoff, along with two bio-patent techies.
A previous webinar was held on the Prometheus case, in which the SCOTUS unanimously struck down a patent on so-called "personalized medicine."  The Myriad and Prometheus cases are closely linked.
In the wake of the previous webinar, the guiding hand behind it, Pamela Sherrid, conducted a poll with some not so surprising results: 75% of the patent professionals responding said the SCOTUS got the law wrong; 66% said they could get around the decision by clever claim drafting.  Finally, the poll asked several questions about the Myriad case.  Here's the surprise: 44% said the decision would be the same, with 41% saying the Court would take the DOJ position (See page 57 of "OPB") and, not surprisingly, only 15% saying all claims would be invalidated.  The poll is located at:
http://ipchat.biz/prometheuspoll.html