| dbo:abstract
|
- Mayo v. Prometheus, 566 U.S. 66 (2012), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that unanimously held that claims directed to a method of giving a drug to a patient, measuring metabolites of that drug, and with a known threshold for efficacy in mind, deciding whether to increase or decrease the dosage of the drug, were not patent-eligible subject matter. The decision was controversial, with proponents claiming it frees clinical pathologists to practice their medical discipline, and critics claiming that it destabilizes patent law and will stunt investment in the field of personalized medicine, preventing new products and services from emerging in that field. (en)
|
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 29626 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:arguedate
|
- 0001-12-07 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:argueyear
| |
| dbp:case
|
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., (en)
|
| dbp:cornell
| |
| dbp:courtlistener
| |
| dbp:decidedate
|
- 0001-03-20 (xsd:gMonthDay)
|
| dbp:decideyear
| |
| dbp:docket
| |
| dbp:fullname
|
- Mayo Collaborative Services, DBA Mayo Medical Laboratories, et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (en)
|
| dbp:googlescholar
| |
| dbp:holding
|
- Claims directed to a diagnostic method that involved observing a natural correlation were not patent eligible subject matter. (en)
|
| dbp:joinmajority
| |
| dbp:justia
| |
| dbp:litigants
| |
| dbp:majority
| |
| dbp:oralargument
| |
| dbp:otherSource
| |
| dbp:otherUrl
| |
| dbp:oyez
| |
| dbp:parallelcitations
| |
| dbp:prior
| |
| dbp:uspage
| |
| dbp:usvol
| |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdf:type
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Mayo v. Prometheus, 566 U.S. 66 (2012), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that unanimously held that claims directed to a method of giving a drug to a patient, measuring metabolites of that drug, and with a known threshold for efficacy in mind, deciding whether to increase or decrease the dosage of the drug, were not patent-eligible subject matter. The decision was controversial, with proponents claiming it frees clinical pathologists to practice their medical discipline, and critics claiming that it destabilizes patent law and will stunt investment in the field of personalized medicine, preventing new products and services from emerging in that field. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
|
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| foaf:name
|
- Mayo Collaborative Services,DBAMayo Medical Laboratories, et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (en)
|
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
