A

fter this week’s oral arguments in the patent dispute over the CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology, the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT seemed to be sitting pretty: the three judges peppered the University of California’s attorney with many more skeptical questions.

And now it seems the Broad may have another ace up its sleeve: A filing claiming its scientist conceived the genome-editing invention more than a year before his rival at UC published her seminal paper on CRISPR in June 2012.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus. Try it FREE for 30 days!

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

What is it?

STAT Plus is a premium subscription that delivers daily market-moving biopharma coverage and in-depth science reporting from a team with decades of industry experience.

What's included?

  • Authoritative biopharma coverage and analysis, interviews with industry pioneers, policy analysis, and first looks at cutting edge laboratories and early stage research
  • Subscriber-only networking events and panel discussions across the country
  • Monthly subscriber-only live chats with our reporters and experts in the field
  • Discounted tickets to industry events and early-bird access to industry reports

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

Sign up for our Morning Rounds newsletter

Your daily dose of what’s new in health and medicine.

Privacy Policy