23-01-2020
servickuz / shutterstock.com
A competitor of the Broad Institute has said that a European Patent Office (EPO) ruling last week has weakened the CRISPR/Cas9 patent owner’s negotiating hand in any future settlement between the parties.
Life Sciences Intellectual Property Review (LSIPR) tracks the increasing challenges for intellectual property specialists in the rapidly evolving world of life sciences. From gene patents to stem cell research, we provide the very best news and analysis.
To continue reading this article and to access 4,500+ articles, our digital magazines and special reports published for LSIPR subscribers only then you will need a subscription.
If you are already subscribed please login.
Official LSIPR subscribers include:
Allen & Overy
Arnold & Siedsma
Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch LLP (BSKB)
Carpmaels & Ransford
Cooley
European Patent Office
Finnegan LLP
GH Research
Gowling WLG
George Washington Law School
HGF Limited
IQVIA
Kirkland & Ellis International LLP
Marks & Clerk
Mintz Levin
NiKang Therapeutics Inc.
Powell Gilbert LLP
Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP
Taylor Wessing
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
Valea AB
World Intellectual Property Office
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription we can add you into for FREE, please contact Atif at achoudhury@newtonmedia.co.
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
ERS Genomics, Broad Institute, CRISPR/Cas9, Eric Rhodes, Emmannuelle Charpentier, settlement
USPTO rules Broad owns CRISPR animal cell editing patents
01-03-2022
Zebrafish start-up secures CRISPR licence
18-02-2021
EPO reveals decision behind Broad patent revocation
09-11-2020
ERS Genomics appoints vice-president of IP
23-09-2020
Broad and ERS Genomics both claim victory in latest CRISPR ruling
14-09-2020
