This is an interesting point, and this very background may have found its way into the ruling. Specifically, that the judge has a background in chemistry and d

This is an interesting point, and this very background may have found its way into the ruling. Specifically, that the judge has a background in chemistry and directly speaks to the difference in perspective between biologists and chemists : "We recognize that biologists may think of molecules in terms of their uses, but genes are in fact materials having a chemical nature and, as such, are best described in patents by their structures rather than by their functions" [1] The blogger goes on to state in more plain terms : "In other words, this ruling affirms that molecular biology is, in fact, chemistry, if you want to look at it that way." [1]http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/08/17/the_myriad_gene_patent_case_trickier_than_you_might_think.php http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2012/08/17/the_myriad_g...