navigating the patent maze

In a previous post, the issue at stake in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Lab Corp v. Metabolite, was discussed.  This morning, the Supreme Court dismissed the case on a procedural basis thus not needing to reach a decision on the merits.  A dissent, written by J. Breyer and joined by J. Stevens and J. Souter, however provides insight into what might have been a "majority opinion" of the merits.  The dissent emphatically believed that the claim, directed to assaying homocysteine levels and correlating an elevated level with a vitamin deficiency, was a claim for a "natural phenomenon".  Natural phenomena are not patentable under U.S. law. 

Until such time as the Federal Circuit or Supreme Court in the U.S. revisit issues of patent eligibility, the claim - and claims like it - are valid.