Broad Institute and UCB to face off at CRISPR interference hearing

An interference proceeding on the patent rights to CRISPR/Cas9 will take place on December 6, with the judges setting the definition of the disputed invention as “the use of CRISPR in a method in a eukaryotic cell”.

The University of California, Berkeley (UCB), joined by the University of Vienna and Emmanuelle Charpentier,  is arguing that this decision on the definition should be revisited.

UCB and its opponent, the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, will appear in front of three judges at the US Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) headquarters in Virginia.

The proceeding, which was requested by UCB, will determine which party is the owner of the US patent rights to the gene-editing technology.

In the interference proceeding, the Broad Institute is requesting priority based on its patent application filed on December 12, 2012. This allegedly includes examples demonstrating the use of the CRISPR system to conduct genome editing in eukaryotic cells.

UCB, which filed applications on May 25, 2012 as well as in 2013 and 2014, is similarly asking for its applications to be prioritised.

Despite the US having moved to a “first to file” patent system in March 2013, the interference proceeding will be decided based on the “first to invent” system.

The USPTO will consider and compare historical documentary evidence from the Broad Institute, MIT and Harvard, and UCB concerning invention dates.

In the oral hearing, which comes at the request of both parties, attorneys for each side will have 20 minutes to make their arguments.

All arguments will be limited to issues related to the motions already filed by the parties, and according to a press release by the Broad Institute, no new information is expected to be presented.

As of November 2016, the USPTO had issued 42 patents with claims to CRISPR and/or Cas9.

The USPTO announced interference proceeding in January.