Chapter 7: Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013)
Document Type
Book Chapter
Publication Date
10-2021
Editor(s)
Eloisa C. Rodriguez-Dod and Elena Maria Marty-Nelson
ISBN
9781108812870
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Language
en-US
Abstract
JUSTICE KALI MURRAY, WITH WHOM JUSTICE ERIKA GEORGE JOINS, CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART
The public has a substantial interest in having a functional and equitable patent system. An invalid patent, like an invalid statute, can have significant effects on a range of social interests. Those interested in a properly functioning patent system are many and varied: scientists, researchers, and engineers creating advances in technology; manufacturers and designers implementing and vending these advances in the marketplace; consumers putting these inventions and discoveries to their own productive use; patients who may need access to healthcare advances generated by patents; and individuals whose genetic information may serve as the basic elements of patentable research. Just as these stakeholders benefit from a properly functioning patent system, they can suffer injury from invalid patents. And injury calls upon the courts to make the injured whole. See, e.g., Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 163 (1803).
Recommended Citation
Dan L. Burk, Kali Murray & Erika George,
Chapter 7: Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576 (2013)
,
in
Feminist Judgments: Rewritten Property Opinions
121
(Eloisa C. Rodriguez-Dod and Elena Maria Marty-Nelson ed.,
2021).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/3836
