Mar 8 2010
Precision BioSciences, Inc., today announced that the United States
Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has issued non-final Actions Closing
Prosecution in the reexamination proceedings for U.S. Pat. Nos.
6,833,252 (“the ‘252 patent”) and 7,214,536 (“the ‘536 patent”) that are
owned by the Institut Pasteur and the Universite Pierre et Marie Cure
(UPMC), and licensed to Cellectis, SA (ALCLS). For the second time, the
PTO has rejected all claims under consideration as lacking novelty
and/or as obvious in view of a variety of references, including many
that were not provided to the patent examiners during prosecution by the
patent applicants.
“Although we believe that Precision BioSciences’ DNE technology clearly
doesn’t infringe the claims of either the ‘252 patent or the ‘536
patent, Precision made the decision to seek reexamination of these
patents because Cellectis has asserted two related patents against us”
“Although we believe that Precision BioSciences’ DNE technology clearly
doesn’t infringe the claims of either the ‘252 patent or the ‘536
patent, Precision made the decision to seek reexamination of these
patents because Cellectis has asserted two related patents against us,”
said Matthew Kane, CEO of Precision BioSciences. Cellectis has asserted
U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,610,545 (“the ‘545 patent”) and 7,309,605 (“the ‘605
patent”), which are related to the ‘252 patent and the ‘536 patent, in
litigation against Precision. Precision also requested reexamination of
the ‘545 and ‘605 patents, and those reexamination proceedings are
on-going.
“After Cellectis instigated this litigation, Precision identified a
variety of prior art references which, we believe, anticipate or render
obvious the claims of many of the Institut Pasteur/UPMC patents licensed
by Cellectis, including the ‘252 patent, the ‘536 patent, the ‘545
patent, the ‘605 patent, and others,” stated Derek Jantz, VP of
Scientific Development at Precision. “We are pleased to see that the
examiners at the PTO, in issuing the various rejections of the claims of
the ‘252 patent and the ‘536 patent under reexamination, seem to have
agreed, and we expect that the same prior art references will lead to
similar rejections of all of the claims of the ‘545 patent and the ‘605
patent asserted in the litigation,” Dr. Jantz continued.
Precision BioSciences is evaluating whether to request the reexamination
of additional U.S. patents owned or licensed by Cellectis.
The patent owners have the right to file comments on these Actions
Closing Prosecution in an effort to persuade the patent examiners to
reconsider their positions. If the examiners maintain the rejections,
the patent owners can appeal the decisions to the PTO’s Board of Patent
Appeals and Interferences. Interested parties can find copies of the
PTO’s Actions Closing Prosecution at: www.precisionbiosciences.com/news.
About Precision BioSciences