Genetic Technologies Ltd. v. Agilent Technologies, Inc.

Good Law
24 F. Supp. 3d 922·2014 WL 941354·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31474
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMarch 7, 2014No. CV 12-01616 RSCalifornia4,720 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Seeborg, J.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Genetic Technologies Limited (“GTG”) brings this action for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,612,179 (“the '179 patent”) against defendant Agilent Technologies, Inc. Agilent moves to dismiss plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing the '179 patent claims an unpatentable law of nature. Although the '179 patent does embrace a law of nature, defendant’s motion to dismiss must be denied, because Agilent has not shown by clear and convincing evidence that the patent does not claim meaningfully limited applications of that natural law.

II. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

On May 25, 2011, GTG filed a complaint asserting infringement of the '179 patent against multiple defendants, including Agi-lent, in the District Court of Colorado. Agilent, like many of the other defendants in the case, moved to dismiss the complaint and sever plaintiffs claims against them. Following an initial Rule 16 conference and some preliminary motion practice on discovery matters, the court granted defendants’ respective motions to sever plaintiffs claims, and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.