Circuits Assembly Magazine’s blog posted What Can a Patent Cover? which alerted me to this case argued at the Supreme Court on Tuesday:
“Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings is suing Metabolite Laboratories Inc. over a patented method for diagnosing B vitamin deficiencies. After several years of litigation and appeals, the case has made it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Why should the electronics industry be watching the outcome?
Because, for the first time in 25 years, the Supremes are listening to arguments over what can — and cannot — be patented. Its ruling could send shock waves through the industry.”
I agree with Mike that this is potentially dramatic for industry (electronic and more). I am rooting for LabCorp because I feel that overly broad patents (where thinking could be infringing), or patents covering nature (rather than an application of such in a unique way) are endangering our patent system.
Just a small correction, Metabolite sued LabCorp, not the other way around. LabCorp has appealed this decision in the Supreme Court. But you both are right, this could have a huge implication either way on the scope of patent protection.
Just a small correction, Metabolite sued LabCorp, not the other way around. LabCorp has appealed this decision in the Supreme Court. But you both are right, this could have a huge implication either way on the scope of patent protection.