Broad prevails over Berkeley in CRISPR patent dispute

Abstract

A long legal dispute over the rights to CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing has climaxed. In a decision released on Sept. 10, a U.S. federal court ruled in favor of Broad Institute of MIT & Harvard, agreeing with a lower court that Broad’s patents for CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing didn’t interfere with a patent application from CRISPR’s other inventors at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Vienna. That decision is a victory for Broad scientist Feng Zhang and Editas Medicine, a company he cofounded to develop CRISPR-based therapies. But it leaves two other major CRISPR companies without a foundational U.S. patent on the technology they are based on. One is Intellia Therapeutics, cofounded by UC Berkeley’s Jennifer Doudna; the other is Crispr Therapeutics, cofounded by Emmanuelle Charpentier, formerly at Vienna and now at the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology. UC Berkeley could request a rehearing or attempt to take