The US Patent and Trademark Office has once again decided that the institute has priority over the University of California and collaborators regarding intellectual property rights for CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing in eukaryotes. But the fight over the technique isn’t over.

If confirmed, Lander will head the Office of Science and Technology Policy, a position that President Donald Trump left vacant for 18 months at the beginning of his term.

Hundreds of CRISPR patents have been granted around the world, and the number of applications continues to grow at a rapid pace.

The US patent office declares an interference between the intellectual property held by the Broad Institute and several patent applications filed by the University of California—opposite its previous ruling.

The higher court’s decision to uphold the ruling of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board essentially ends the intellectual property battle in the US.

In an ongoing legal battle, the University of California, Berkeley has challenged the Broad Institute’s patent claims on the gene editing technology.

This is the second patent the European Patent Office has issued to the institutions of Jennifer Doudna, Emmanuelle Charpentier, and colleagues.

The battle for the control of the intellectual property surrounding CRISPR-Cas9 is as storied and nuanced as the technology itself.

The University of California files a brief in its appeal challenging the ruling that the Broad Institute’s group would retain its CRISPR genome-editing patent.

The Broad Institute and others sign on to participate in a platform designed to streamline the licensing process. 

The European Patent Office will grant patent rights over the use of CRISPR in all cell types to a University of California team, contrasting with a recent decision in the U.S.

The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board has ruled in favor of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard retaining intellectual property rights covered by its patents for CRISPR gene-editing technology.

This year, the developers of CRISPR gene-editing technology argued over patent rights, a researcher fought to unmask anonymous PubPeer commenters, US regulators considered “three-parent” babies, and troubles continued for Theranos.

The Scientist goes to court for a CRISPR patent interference case at the US Patent and Trademark Office.

Documents suggest Feng Zhang started working on CRISPR before Jennifer Doudna’s group published; researchers call for CRISPR technology to be shared openly

This week’s CRISPR patent hearing took a deep dive into the science of moving the gene-editing technology from prokaryotes to eukaryotic systems.

Tuesday morning, the US Patent and Trademark Office will hear oral arguments from the two parties that claim to have been the first to use CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing technology in eukaryotic cells.