분자유전학실험실 (단국대학교 분자생물학과)



 이성욱 ( 2017-02-16 09:52:40 , Hit : 953
 Judges Side with Broad Institute in CRISPR Patent Dispute

http://www.genengnews.com/gen-news-highlights/judges-side-with-broad-institute-in-crispr-patent-dispute/81253890?utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=GEN+Daily+News+Highlights&utm_content=01&utm_campaign=GEN+Daily+News+Highlights_20170215


GEN News Highlights

February 15, 2017

A three-judge panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has ruled in favor of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard in the bitter legal battle royal with University of California (UC), Berkeley, over who invented CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) gene-editing technology.

The PTAB panel found “no interference in fact” between 12 patents related to CRISPR technology that list as inventor Feng Zhang, Ph.D., of the Broad Institute, and a patent application by Jennifer Doudna, Ph.D., of UC Berkeley, and Emmanuelle Charpentier, Ph.D., of the Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research.

As a result, the application can be returned to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) examiner who previously determined it allowable for review.

The Doudna/Charpentier application states claims covering the use of CRISPR in a bacterial system, while the Broad's patents focus on the use of CRISPR in eukaryotic systems, such as plants and higher animals. UC Berkeley, Dr. Doudna, and Dr. Charpentier challenged the Broad patents, contending that the application of CRISPR to eukaryotic systems represented an obvious rather than an inventive invention, and was thus nonpatentable. The Broad has defended its patents.

“This evidence shows that the parties’ claims do not interfere. Accordingly, we terminate the interference,” the PTAB panel ruled. “The evidence shows that the invention of such systems in eukaryotic cells would not have been obvious over the invention of CRISPR/Cas9 systems in any environment, including in prokaryotic cells or in vitro, because one of ordinary skill in the art would not have reasonably expected a CRISPR/Cas9 system to be successful in an eukaryotic environment.”

In a statement, Broad emphasized the potential of CRISPR technology to generate far more patents than those at issue in the legal dispute.

“CRISPR research is a very large field that involves contributions from talented scientists around the world. We have deep respect for all of these scientific contributions, including the work from Emmanuelle Charpentier, Jennifer Doudna, and their teams, as well as all of those who continue to advance the field and educate the public about this important technology,” Broad stated.

Broad said it would continue to work with partner organizations “to disseminate and share CRISPR genome-editing tools to maximize public benefit, especially by continuing to make this transformative technology widely available to the worldwide academic community and for commercial and human therapeutic research.

“We believe CRISPR should continue to be available to the global scientific community to advance our understanding of the biology and treatment of human disease, and to help lay the groundwork for a new generation of therapies,” Broad added.

The PTAB panel heard oral arguments in December when it considered whether an “interference” proceeding aimed at resolving the impasse could proceed, as declared in January by Administrative Patent Judge Deborah Katz of the USPTO.

In its own statement, UC Berkeley continued to maintain that evidence “overwhelmingly” supports its position that the team of Drs. Doudna and Charpentier was the first group to invent the technology for use in all settings and all cell types. It continues to assert that the team was the first to publish and file patent applications directed toward that invention, and that the Broad Institute’s patents were not patentably distinct from the Doudna/Charpentier invention.

“For that reason, UC will carefully consider all options for possible next steps in this legal process, including the possibility of an appeal of the PTAB’s decision,” UC Berkeley stated. “We will be guided, as always, by the public’s best interest and will continue to support and advance fundamental research, such as CRISPR/Cas9, that can help solve our greatest challenges across human health, agriculture, and the environment.”

Editas Medicine—whose co-founders include Drs. Zhang and Doudna—hailed the PTAB panel decision in a statement lauding Broad’s “innovative and fundamental work” on CRISPR technology. Editas was launched in 2013 to translate their genome editing research into new therapeutics

“This important decision affirms the inventiveness of the Broad’s work in translating the biology of the natural world into fundamental building blocks to create unprecedented medicines,” stated Katrine Bosley, president and CEO of Editas. “We are continuing to invest in this technology to build our business for the long-term and to create genome-editing therapies for patients suffering from genetically-defined and genetically-treatable diseases.”







1167   Scientists unveil CRISPR-based diagnostic platform  이성욱 2017/04/14 812
1166   [사이언스 카페] 美 FDA, 민간업체의 '개인용 유전자 검사' 첫 허용  이성욱 2017/04/10 795
1165   암 전이에 핵심 역할하는 줄기세포 찾았다  이성욱 2017/04/03 1163
1164   ‘단세포 인공생명체’ 눈앞에 성큼  이성욱 2017/03/11 793
1163   Beyond CRISPR Cuts: Five Complements To Cas9  이성욱 2017/02/24 986
1162   Smallest CRISPR So Far Comes from Food Poisoning Bacteria  이성욱 2017/02/24 923
1161   CRISPR Turbocharges CAR T Cells, Boosts Cancer Immunotherapy  이성욱 2017/02/24 1289
1160   [바이오토픽] 브로드 연구소, 열띤 CRISPR 특허전쟁에서 승리  이성욱 2017/02/16 1056
  Judges Side with Broad Institute in CRISPR Patent Dispute  이성욱 2017/02/16 953
1158   미국 과학·공학·의학 아카데미, 「GM 베이비」의 진행방향에 대한 윤곽 발표  이성욱 2017/02/16 1070
1157   Nano-CRISPR Packages Attain 90% Delivery Rate with Engineered Cas9  이성욱 2017/02/09 1325
1156   유전자 치료로 청력 되살린다  이성욱 2017/02/08 1347
1155   바이러스들도 서로 소통..“상황에 따라 감염방식 결정”  이성욱 2017/01/24 1131
1154   Oligonucleotide Therapeutics Near Approval  이성욱 2017/01/10 1166
1153   Off Switch Found for Common Version of the CRISPR-Cas9 System  이성욱 2017/01/02 992
1152   Editas Expands CRISPR Capabilities through New Technology Licensing  이성욱 2016/12/22 819
1151   RNA Modification Helps Drosophila Straighten Up and Fly Right  이성욱 2016/12/10 885
1150   Anti-CRISPR Protein Is Gene Editing “Off-Switch”  이성욱 2016/12/10 1890
1149   Could Gene Therapy Work for Alzheimer’s Disease?  이성욱 2016/10/12 1156
1148   EU, 2번째 유전자치료제 ‘스트림벨리스’ 승인  이성욱 2016/09/05 1145

[1][2][3][4][5] 6 [7][8][9][10]..[64] [다음 10개]
 

Copyright 1999-2021 Zeroboard / skin by ROBIN