An appellate court in the United States affirmed the Patent Office's finding that the Broad Institute's patents covering eukaryotic applications of CRISPR-Cas9 was separately patentable over the University of California's (UC) earlier patent application. This does not bode well for future negotiations between UC and the Broad Institute, even as nuclease technology continues to eclipse the original dispute. This perspective explores the appellate decision, where UC goes from here, and what this all means for scientists in the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Broad Institute, Inc., Case. No. 2017-1907 (Fed. Cir. Sept.10, 2018). Available online at https://perma.cc/82FU-2NJA (accessed October9, 2018).
SherkowJS. Inventive steps: the CRISPR patent dispute and scientific progress. EMBO Rep, 2017; 18:1047–1050. DOI: 10.15252/embr.201744418.
7.
ŠikšnysV, GasiunasG, KarvelisT, inventors; Vilinus University, assignee. RNA-directed DNA-cleavage by the Cas9-crrna complex. U.S. Patent 9,637,739. March15, 2013.
8.
KabinX, MinkenbergB, YangY. Boosting CRISPR/Cas9 multiplex editing capability with the endogenous tRNA-processing system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2015; 112:3570–3575. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1420294112.
