On July 14, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued new subject matter eligibility guidance for life science claims following a ruling by the Federal Circuit in Rapid Litigation Management v. CellzDirect, No. 15-1570 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016), and the Supreme Court’s decision to deny certiorari in Sequenom v. Ariosa, (788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (cert. denied).  The USPTO noted that the cases do not change the subject matter eligibility framework, but rather “provide additional information and clarification on the inquiry for determining whether claims are directed to a judicial exception” (step one of the Mayo/Alice test).

A recent Federal Circuit decision in Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, gives patent owners another illustration of patent subject matter eligibility under section 101.

On July 5, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion vacating the summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 7,604,929 (“the ’929 Patent”) and sent the case back to the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.  See Rapid Litigation Management Ltd., et al. v. CellzDirect, Inc., et al., No. 2015-1570 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 5, 2016)(“Opinion”).  The ’929 Patent is directed to a method of preserving hepatocytes using multiple freeze-thaw cycles.  This process is distinct from the prior art, which taught that hepatocytes would remain viable only after a single freeze-thaw cycle.