UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA V. BROAD INSTITUTE, INC.
- Sep 24 2018 |
- Category: CAFC Updates
The University of California appeals a decision of the PTAB determining there was no interference-in-fact between the University’s pending application (relating to the use of a CRISPR-Cas9 system for the targeted cutting of DNA molecules) and the claims of twelve patents and one application owned by the Broad Institute. Noting that the Board performed an exhaustive analysis of the factual evidence and considered a variety of statements by experts for both parties and the inventors, past failures and successes in the field, evidence of simultaneous invention, and the extent to which the art provided instructions for applying the CRISPRCas9 technology in a new environment, the CAFC concludes that substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that there was not a reasonable expectation of success, and that the Board did not err in its determination that there is no interference-in-fact. Accordingly, the CAFC affirms.