It has taken nearly six years, detours for bitter legal challenges, and tens of millions of dollars in legal fees, but the foundational CRISPR-Cas9 patent for which the University of California applied in March 2013 will soon be granted, according to documents posted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on Friday, throwing yet another monkey wrench into genome editing’s tangled IP landscape.

Based on the pioneering research of UC Berkeley biochemist Jennifer Doudna, Emmanuelle Charpentier (of Sweden’s Umea University at the time of the key study), and their colleagues, the ‘859 patent, as aficionados fondly call it, covers the use of CRISPR, in particular a single molecule of RNA acting as a genome-sniffing bloodhound, paired with the Cas9 DNA-cutting enzyme to edit genomes. The patent office’s “notice of allowance” means that the patent will be issued in about six to eight weeks.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

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.

  • This is like patenting the discovery of penicillin. It would set humanity back. Tell her thank you. Build her a monument. And envite her to all the parties. Now, let those with the imagination and knowledge to build our tomorrow.

    • No, it’s not. It is the invention of a new and useful technology. Without the patent system, who would fund making these inventions? Basically, you are proposing that we do not have such inventions. That was the viewpoint of the Luddites, who wanted to live in the world of the past without new inventions.

Sign up for our Daily Recap newsletter

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy