LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc.

LabCorp of Am. Holdings v. Metabolite Labs., Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued March 21, 2006 Decided June 22, 2006
Full case name	Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (d/b/a LabCorp) v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc. et al.
Docket no.	03-1120
Citations	548 U.S. 124 (more) 126 S. Ct. 2921; 165 L. Ed. 2d 399; 79 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1065
Argument	Oral argument
Opinion announcement	Opinion announcement
Case history
Prior	Judgment for plaintiff, judgment as a matter of law for defendant denied, Metabolite Labs, Inc. v. Lab. Corp. of Am. Holdings, No. 1:99-cv-00870 (D. Colo. 2002); 370 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2004), cert. granted, 546 U.S. 999 (2005).
Subsequent	Lab. Corp. of Am. Holdings v. Metabolite Labs., Inc., 571 F. Supp. 2d 1199 (D. Colo. 2008) (partial relitigation); 599 F.3d 1277 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (denying jurisdiction and transferring appeal); 410 F. App'x 151 (10th Cir. 2011) (affirming summary judgment).
Holding
Writ of certiorari dismissed as improvidently granted.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices John P. Stevens · Antonin Scalia Anthony Kennedy · David Souter Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito
Case opinions
Per curiam
Dissent	Breyer, joined by Souter, Stevens

LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc., 548 U.S. 124 (2006), is the first case since Diamond v. Chakrabarty^[1] in which the U.S. Supreme Court indicated a renewed interest in examining the limits of patentable subject matter for advances in life sciences. Although the Court initially agreed to hear the case, it was later dismissed in 2006 with three Justices dissenting.^[2] The defendant's petition to the Supreme Court raised an issue not addressed in opinions from the lower courts: the claim at issue was directed to patent ineligible subject matter and therefore invalid.