12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES- - - - - - - - - - - - - -XLABORATORY CORPORATION :OF AMERICA HOLDINGS, DBA :LABCORP, :Petitioner :V. : No. 04-607METABOLITE LABORATORIES :INC., ET AL. :- - - - - - - - - - - - - -XWashington, D.C.Tuesday, March 21, 2006The above-entitled matter came on for oralargument before the Supreme Court of the United Statesat 11:12 a.m.APPEARANCES:JONATHAN S. FRANKLIN, ESQ., Washington, D.C., on behalfof the Petitioner.THOMAS G. HUNGAR, ESQ., Deputy Solicitor General,United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.,as amicus curiae, supporting the Petitioner.MIGUEL A. ESTRADA, ESQ., Washington, D.C., on behalfof the Respondents.
1
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
C O N T E N T SORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGEJONATHAN S. FRANKLIN, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner 3THOMAS G. HUNGAR, ESQ.On behalf of the United StatesDepartment of Justice, as amicuscuriae, supporting the Petitioner 20MIGUEL A. ESTRADA, ESQ.On behalf of the Respondents 29REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OFJONATHAN S. FRANKLIN, ESQ.On behalf of the Petitioner 48
2
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425
P R O C E E D I N G S(11:12 a.m.)JUSTICE STEVENS: We'll hear argument in number04-607, Laboratory Corporation of America against MetaboliteLaboratories.Mr. Franklin, whenever you're ready, you mayproceed.ORAL ARGUMENT OF JONATHAN S. FRANKLINON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERMR. FRANKLIN: Justice Stevens, and may itplease the Court:The patent claim at issue in this case washeld to be infringed whenever any doctor looks at ahomocysteine test result and reflexively thinks about abasic natural correlation. The result has been multimilliondollar damages and an injunction prohibiting a testingcompany from conducting important homocysteine tests by anymethod and for any reason whatsoever.As broadly construed by the Federal Circuit,this claim is invalid as a matter of law for two closelyrelated reasons. It contravenes both of this Court'ssettled proscription against effectively patenting laws ofnature or natural phenomena as well as the requirement thata patent must fully and clearly describe, disclose andenable an actual invention and must not sweep so far as to
3
1111 14th Street, NW Suite 400 Alderson Reporting Company Washington, DC 200051-800-FOR-DEPO
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
