1. “Whether the district court erred as a matter of law in holding, under 35 U.S.C. § 101, that claims to laboratory-made host cells genetically engineered to contain DNA from at least two different organisms chemically spliced together to form a recombinant nucleic acid molecule cover something that is naturally occurring, when nothing like the claimed host cells appears in nature.”
2. “Whether the district court erred as a matter of law in concluding, under 35 U.S.C. § 101, that claims to laboratory-made host cells genetically engineered to contain DNA from at least two different organisms chemically spliced together in a recombinant nucleic acid molecule are not markedly different in structure and/or function from a natural product, when no natural product has similar structural or functional characteristics.”
3. “Whether the district court failed to draw reasonable factual inferences in Appellants’ favor in granting Sarepta’s motion for summary judgment.”
