|
 The outcome could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars as
scientists say the powerful technology allows for easier and more
precise genetic engineering in living cells. This could lead to
advances in plant and animal research and the treatment of deadly
human diseases.
A tribunal within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, which
initiated the proceeding known as an interference, will now examine
both sides' evidence, a process that could take months, to determine
who should own a patent on the technology.
The dispute pits a team from the University of California, Berkeley,
led by researcher Jennifer Doudna, against a group from the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, led by Feng Zhang, and the
Broad Institute, a research organization in Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
While Doudna's team was the first to file an application for a
patent on the technology, in 2013, the Broad-MIT team was first to
be granted a patent, in April 2014.
In April, Doudna's team requested the interference for the PTO to
reconsider who deserves the patent. On Monday it designated her team
as the "senior party," which means it is presumed to be the first
inventor.
Lee McGuire, the Broad Institute's spokesman, said in a statement
that the senior party status is a temporary designation and could
change after the evidence is presented.
"(We) are confident the USPTO will reach the same conclusion it did
initially when it awarded the patent and will continue to recognize
the Broad and MIT roles in developing this transformative
technology," he said.
[to top of second column] |
A representative for the University of California, Berkeley declined
to comment.
CRISPR acts like a pair of scissors to cut out and replace parts of
a cell's DNA sequence. Scientists hail its potential for treating
genetic diseases, such as sickle cell anemia, and engineering crops.
Others worry about its possible future use for editing human embryos
to make "designer babies."
CRISPR is being rapidly licensed and commercialized. Intellia
Therapeutics, a company co-founded by Doudna that is using the
technology, said in a statement on Tuesday that "Berkeley has
significant evidence to support their intellectual property."
Editas Medicine, which counts Zhang as a founder, declined to
comment, citing its filing last week for a $100 million initial
public offering.
(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)
[© 2016 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2016 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
