Source: https://www.laipla.net/no-1-lexmark-no-2-ariosa-no-7-promega-certiorari-decisions-june-20-and-27/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 12:37:31+00:00

Document:
In No. (2) Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., Supreme Court No. 15-1182, petitioner questions Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc., 788 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2015), the issue is whether a method to determine the presence in a blood sample of a known substance (here, DNA) is patent-eligible under 35 USC § 101 where that substance, as such, is known and not in any event patent-eligible (cert. decision as early as June 27, 2016).
No. (7) Life Techs. Corp. v. Promega Corp., Supreme Court No. 14-1538, questions Promega Corp. v. Life Techs. Corp., 773 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir., 2014)(Chen, J.), as to whether the appellate tribunal erred in holding that supplying a single, commodity component of a multi-component invention from the United States is an infringing act under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(1) ***.” (cert. decision as early asJune 20, 2016).
If certiorari is granted in any of the cases, briefing would take place over the summer; an argument would likely take place by this coming Winter, and a decision on the merits would be issued before the next Term closes at the end of June 2017.
Details are provided in the attached Top Ten Patent Cases.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 101
 v. 
 v. 
 § 271