Patent Applications on Personalized Medicine
Many predicted that the Supreme Court’s 2012 decision in Mayo v. Prometheus would have a major impact on the patenting of personalized medicine inventions. In their Patently-O Patent Law Journal essay, Professor Bernard Chao and Amy Mapes (Denver J.D. ’17) took a look at the data. Sampling 294 applications in Art unit 1634, they found a dramatic increase in § 101 rejections. Only 15.9% of the office actions issued pre-Mayo had rejections under section 101 for subject matter eligibility. In contrast, 86.4% of the office actions issued post-Mayo had rejections under section 101 for subject matter eligibility. The chart below illustrates how these rejections breakdown in the years that precede and follow Mayo. You can find the whole article here.