The PTAB decides there is no interference-in-fact

After hearing motions from both parties, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rules that there was no interference-in-fact. The board decides that the Broad’s claims to the use of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing in eukaryotic cells are patentably distinct from the broader claims of the Doudna-Charpentier team.

This decision terminates the interference at what is known as the motions phase, before the PTAB would have considered other motions or evaluated the evidence to determine who was first to invent CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing (this second phase is known as the priority phase).


Download the PTAB Decision on Motions


Sign up to receive updates from the CRISPR Collective

Related News

US Patent Covering Optimized Guide RNA Formats for CRISPR/Cas9 in Eukaryotic Cells Issued to The Regents of the University of California, the University of Vienna, and Dr. Emmanuelle Charpentier
Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer A. Doudna among the 2018 Kavli Award winners
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears oral arguments in appeal of PTAB ruling
Read moreArrow-down