UC Berkeley loses another round in legal dispute with Broad Institute over CRISPR patents


A federal appeals court has rejected arguments that UC Berkeley has exclusive rights to patents for the powerful CRISPR gene-editing tool, casting a pall over the university’s future earnings from a technique which gives scientists near godlike power: altering the genetic sequences of cells.

On [September 10], the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington upheld an earlier ruling that patents held for inventions by the Harvard University-affiliated Broad Institute were different than what’s covered by UC’s applications, and do not interfere with each other.

[The decision] means that Broad can keep its patents and continue to share the technology with many licensees, most notably Editas Medicine of Cambridge, MA.

In response, “we are evaluating further litigation options,” said Charles F. Robinson of UC’s Office of the President, suggesting an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Related article:  Agricultural firm Simplot receives first commercial license for CRISPR gene editing, focusing on cutting waste

UC contested a dozen CRISPR-based patents held by Broad, saying that their discoveries overlapped. The university has spent millions of dollars on the fight, a cost reimbursed by Berkeley-based biotech startup Caribou Biosciences, which has licensed the tool.

“It is time for all institutions to move beyond litigation,” Broad Institute said in an official statement. “We should work together to ensure wide, open access to this transformative technology.”

Read full, original article: UC loses legal fight over CRISPR gene editing patents

Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend