CRISPR ruling means legal fight will continue

A ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit promises to extend the legal battle over which party owns the use of CRISPR in eukaryotic cells.

In another victory for The Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, the CAFC affirmed Monday a ruling from the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that Broad's patent covering CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing technology with co-inventor Feng Zhang does not interfere with CRISPR IP from the Regents of University of California and co-inventors Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier. In its February 2017 decision, PTAB concluded that Broad's IP covers distinct subject matter from UC's and thus both sets of IP are patentable separately. The CAFC ruling ended patent interference proceedings brought by UC. ...