Document: 547 U. S. ___ (2006) LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA HOLDINGS, DBA LABCORP, PETITIONER v. METABOLITE LABORATORIES, INC., ET AL. No. 04-607. Supreme Court of United States. June 22, 2006. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS FOR FEDERAL CIRCUIT PER CURIAM. The writ certiorari is dismissed as improvidently granted. CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision this case. BREYER, with whom STEVENS and SOUTER join, dissenting. This case involves a patent that claims process for helping to diagnose deficiencies two vitamins, folate cobalamin. consists using any test (whether patented unpatented) measure level body fluid an amino acid called homocysteine then noticing whether its elevated above norm; if so, vitamin deficiency likely. lower courts held claim valid. They also found petitioner, Laboratory Corporation America Holdings (LabCorp), liable inducing infringe- ment when it encouraged doctors order diagnostic tests measuring homocysteine. assessed damages. And they enjoined LabCorp from would lead serves find by taking account homocys- teine levels. We granted determine invalid on ground improp- erly seeks "claim monopoly over basic scientific relationship," Pet. Cert. i, namely, relationship between deficiency. has In my view, we should not dismiss writ. question pre- sented unusually difficult. have authority decide it. said do so. parties amici fully briefed question. those who en- gage medical research, practice medicine, patients depend upon proper health care, might well benefit Court's authoritative answer. I A relevant principle law "[e]xclude[s] . protection laws nature, natural phenomena, abstract ideas." Diamond Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 185 (1981). finds roots both English American law. See, e.g., Neilson Harford, Webster's Patent Cases 295, 371 (1841); Le Roy Tatham, 14 How. 156. 175 (1853); O'Reilly Morse, 15 62 (1854); Telephone Cases, 126 1 (1888). means Einstein could "patent[ed] his celebrated E=mc2; nor Newton gravity." Chakrabarty, 447 303, 309 (1980). Neither can one "a novel useful mathematical formula," Parker Flook, 437 584, 585 (1978), motive power electromagnetism steam, supra, at 116, "the heat sun, electric- ity, qualities metals," Funk Brothers Seed Co. Kalo Inoculant Co., 333 127, 130 (1948). justification does lie "laws nature" are obvious, their dis- covery easy, useful. To con- trary, research into such matters may be costly time- consuming; monetary incentives matter; fruits prove great human race. Rather, reason exclusion sometimes too much protec- tion impede rather than "promote Progress Science Arts," constitutional objective copyright protection. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 8. problem arises fact patents only encourage providing invention. Sometimes presence discourage impeding free exchange information, example forcing researchers avoid use poten- tially ideas, leading them conduct time-consuming searches existing pending pat- ents, requiring complex licensing arrangements, raising costs some- times prohibitively dangers overprotection just surely diminished incentive invent underprotection threaten. One way which sail these opposing risky shoals through rules bring certain types invention discovery within scope patentability while excluding others. scholars noted "patent law['s] exclu[sion of] fundamental (in- cluding mathematical) technological principles," (like copyright's "ideas") rule latter variety. W. Landes & R. Posner, Economic Structure Intellectual Property Law 305 (2003). That reflects "both enormous potential rent seeking created property rights obtained [those principles] transaction imposed would-be users." Id., 305-306; cf. Nichols Universal Pictures Corp., 45 F.2d 119, 122 (CA2 1930) (L. Hand, J.). Thus, recognized "[p]henomena though discovered, mental processes, intellectual concepts tools work." Gottschalk Benson, 409 63, 67 (1972). It treated scien- tific principles "part storehouse knowledge" manifestations nature "free all men reserved exclusively none." Bros., 130. doing so judgment pro- tection cases, despite potentially positive incen- tive effects, often severely interfere with, discourage, development further spread knowledge itself. B 1980s three university doctors, after conducting deficiencies, correlation high levels blood essential (folic acid) cobalamin (vitamin B12). developed more accurate methods testing fluids homocysteine, gas chromatography mass spectrometry. published findings 1985. patent. eventually commercial hands Competitive Technologies, Inc. (CTI), licensee Metabolite Laboratories, (Metabolite), respondents here. contains several cover re- searchers' new Supp. App. 30. 1991, (in fact, corporate predeces- sor) license permitting described return 27.5% related revenues. Their agreement permitted termi- nate arrangement cost effective alternative available infringe valid enforceable of" (emphasis added). Until 1998, used paid royalties. By time, however, growing recognition predict risk heart disease led increased demand. Other companies began produce procedures. decided other proceduresa devised Abbott Laboratories cluded was "far superior." 167 (testimony Peter Wentz). continued pay royalties whenever tests. But concluded Abbott's did fall patent's protective scope. consequently refused test. 237 (payment elimi- nated due "change methodology"). response, brought suit against infringement breach agreement. LabCorp's infringed describing meth- ods Instead, relied broader limited tests, namely 13, sole issue claimset forth below entiretyseeks for: "A method detecting warm-blooded animals comprising steps of: "assaying total homocysteine; "correlating folate." Claim argued, protected "correlating" results deficiencies. agreed words fluid" refer all, patented, determines "elevated homo- cysteine." trial, inventors testified 13's step simply physician's recognizing shows levelby very factshows patient likely 108-111 (testi- mony Dr. Sally Stabler); id., 131-148 Robert Allen). added that, because now known, occur automatically mind competent physician. 137-138 (same). On understanding claim, infringe. More specifically, report measured micromoles (millionths mole) per liter (symbolized µmol/L). Doctors, training, know normal range 7 22 µmol/L (and urine 20 µmol/L), 14, correlated Hence, reviewing results, look automati- cally reach conclusion about person suffering 13 therefore covered every doctor reviewed. since had advertised educated correlation, actively doctors' infringing acts. See 35 C. §271(b). jury theory. District calculated damages based unpaid royal- ties some 350,000 performed method. court joined performing "any homocysteine-only test, including, without limitation via method." 36a-37a (internal quotation marks omitted). appealed. argued Federal Circuit trial wrong construe broadly place "every time physician nothing patient's level." Corrected Brief Appellant 03-1120 (CA Fed.), p. 28 (hereinafter Appellant). Indeed, strued (rather construed, say, tests), "invalid indefiniteness, lack written description, non-enablement, anticipation, obviousness." 38. told Circuit: "If were uphold vague anyone obtain correlation there link Bmerely drafting claiming 'test correlate B' that. If upheld, CTI gain own. set- tled allowed. (1981); Chisum Patents §1.03[6]." 41. rejected arguments. "relating deficiency, both, neither." 370 F.3d 1354, 1363 (2004). meaning, said, "discernable clear"; definite, writing, enable virtually follow instruction gives. sufficient. 1366-1367. address argument must struck down improper effort nature. Moreover, concluded, absence ordered read direct infringer. "pub- lishes Continuing Medical Education articles" pieces, urge induces infringement. 1365. Finally, challenge injunction. 1372. filed petition certiorari. Question Three asks "[w]hether direct- ing party 'correlate' validly necessarily infringes merely thinking looking result." i. After calling receiv- views Solicitor General, 543 1185 (2005), petition, Three. II before us construed applied Part IB, light "law principle, IA. believe answer ques- tion. There technical procedural §101 Act, sets subject matter patentable, bounds most comfortably fits. (patent process, machine, manufacture, composition matter"); S., 588-589. practical Circuit, directly consider States Bestfoods, 524 51, 72-73 (1998). Nonetheless, stronger considerations argue our reaching decision. For thing, proce- dural objection tenuous. essence present below. "vague" construction allow "anyone" "obtain correlation;" permit "improperly [to] fact" "settled" "that allowed." 41 (citing 1185; D. Chisum, §1.03[6]) (2006 ed.) Chisum). explic- itly stated "if allows opinion stand [respon- dents] improperly monopolies facts inventions own." 25 supra; Gottschalk, 63; 127; Mackay Radio Telegraph Corp. America, 306 86 (1939)). considering General's advice hear (primarily failure §101), advice, thereby "nec- essarily consider[ing] reject[ing] contention basis denying review." Williams, 504 36, 40 (1992). another good refusing been parties, Government, amici. record comprehensive, allowing learn precise context (which detail), become famil- iar arguments made courts. factual briefing suffers significant gap. No identified prejudice answering indication cite reflected unfair gamesmanship. Of course, help better Lower consid- eration almost always helps. thoroughness leads me conclude extra cost, uncertainty proceedings engender worth benefit. important public interestincluding clarifying area sooner laterargue strongly deciding presented now. IV, infra. III turn merits. animal As provides control efforts patient. Does circumstances, amount "phenomenon nature"? concede category non-patentable "phenom- ena nature," like categories "mental processes," "abstract concepts," easy define. 589 ("The line patentable 'process' unpatentable 'principle' clear"); Nichols, F. 2d, ("[W]e aware [between copyrighted material non-copyrightable ideas], wherever drawn, will seem arbitrary"). many rests inventor's phenomena; "process" seek make workably concrete; conscious action process. generally §1.03, 78-295. Nor easily distinguish instances benefi- cial, harmful, forms Cf. FTC, Promote Innovation: Proper Balance Competition Policy, ch. 3, (Oct. 2003) (herein- FTC) (collecting evidence "issues fixed recovery, appropriability mechanisms, relationships initial follow-on innovation" vary industry); Burk Lemley, Policy Levers Law, 89 Va. L. Rev. 1575, 1577-1589 (2003) ("Recent demonstrated innovation] industry-specific each stage process"). boundary. require "natural phenome- non" doctrine difficult issue. how narrowly reasonably interprets doctrine. little doubt set phenomenon." what petitioners argue. General us. Amicus Curiae 19 (filed Dec. 23, 2005) vitamins 'principle philosophy physical science'") (quoting How., 116)). close concede. Respondents 31 deficien- cies Inventors discovered considered, standing alone, 'natural non' literal sense: observable aspect bio- chemistry least populations"). argue, nonetheless packages form discrete correlating steps. point statements "process 590; see 67, "an application known deserving protection." 187. add "application because, sidered whole, (1) "entails transforma- matter," alteration sample during whatever used, 33 Cochrane Deener, 94 780, 788 (1877); 70), (2) "produces 'useful, concrete, tangible result,'" detection 36 State Street Bank Trust Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 1368, 1373 Fed 1998)). cases support claim. transforming matter. instructs user think them. Why themselves unpatented procedure involved trans- formation blood? indifferent tells all. virtu- ally phenomenon purpose involve empirical informa- suggests renders non patentable. Cochrane, 785 (upholding improving quality flour removing impuri- blasts air); 71-73 (reject- converting numerals binary formula). Circuit's respondents. say produces "useful, F.3d, 1373. never statement and, taken literally, where contrary. Court, example, invalidated electromagnetic current transmit- ting messages long distances even result seems tangible." 16. Similarly setting system triggering alarm limits connection catalytic conversion similar utility, concreteness, tangibility. supra. transforms, computer-programming purposes, decimal figures figureseven useful, arguably (within computer's wiring system) tangible. Even assume (purely argument's sake) meets general definitions entability, still fails here: requirement simple corre- lation, i.e., 588, n. 9 (even assuming improved converter broad statutory definition "process," under doctrine); 184-185 (explaining requirements, meet phenomena well). At most, language "process." cannot numbers knowledge. 192 (warning "al- low[ing] draftsman evade limitations type eligible protection"). might, reduce series steps, Step 1: gather data; 2: number; 3: compare number 4: act accordingly. embody. here, aside embody uncovered. phenomenon," adds anything significance. IV am correct invalid, special interest considera- tions reinforce view fail threatens leave profession restrictions individual others kind. Those inhibit best judgment; force spend unnecessary energy enter agreements; divert resources task care legal searching files correla- tions; raise healthcare inhibit- delivery. Clinical Association 8-13. wrong, valu- able Our diminish area, affecting "substantial claims." 12-14 Aug. 26, 2005). per- mit understand obligations. Con- gress legislation needed. §287(c) (limiting liability practitioners performance surgical dures). either event, generalist contribute ongoing debate, among specialists generalists, system, currently administered enforced, adequately "careful balance" federal laws. embod[y]." Bonito Boats, Thunder Craft 489 141, 146 (1989). eBay MercExchange, C., ___, (slip op., 2) (KENNEDY, J., concurring); 4, 1-44; Pollack, Multiple Unconstitutionality Business Method Pat- ents: Common Sense, Congressional Consideration, Constitutional History, Rutgers Computer Technology J. 61 (2002); Pitofsky, Antitrust Prop- erty: Unresolved Issues Heart New Economy, 16 Berkeley 535, 542-546 (2001). reasons, respectfully dissent.

Category: 8