Legal Opinion
Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided October 30, 2014No. C.A. No. 12-394-LPS, C.A. No. 12-396-LPSPublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
STARK, U.S. District Judge:
Presently before the Court are Defendants’ motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Defendants argue that the patents-in-suit are directed toward unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Court agrees that claim 1 of United States Patent No. 5,612,179 (“the '179 patent”) imper-missibly claims a natural phenomenon and, therefore, grants Defendants’ motions with regard to this claim. With respect to any remaining asserted claims, the Court denies the motions without prejudice to renew.
I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Mayer v. BelichickCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- County of Los Angeles v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Genetic Technologies Limited v. Merial L.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- In re TLI Communications LLC Patent LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2015
- Voip-Pal.Com, Inc. v. Apple Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019
- Procter & Gamble Co. v. QuantifiCare Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2017
- Esoterix Genetic Laboratories LLC v. Qiagen Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.