I appreciate the interesting ideas about the nature of the Myriad patents, and how obviousness could figure in. Now I'll have to revisit the decision again. I don't recall the court getting into those matters as part of its rationale.
I would still argue that the essence of a gene is its information content, in whatever physical embodiment, and thus that a human gene, even stripped of introns and embodied in cDNA form (or on a hard drive, for that matter), is naturally occurring. That's not at all to say that a non-obvious modification to a gene could not be patentable.