EPO Art. 54 EPC · 35 U.S.C. §102 · CRISPR Novelty Landscape

CRISPR Patent Novelty Landscape

Four real CRISPR patent families — Broad/UC Berkeley, Intellia, Caribou, Editas — mapped to ClaimForge novelty-escape workflows with before/after claim language excerpts drawn from the prosecution record.

Quelle: CRISPR-Cas9 Art. 54 Loop

CRISPR-Patentfamilien mit verbrieften Before-/After-Claim-Strukturen

Pilot-Programm anfragen → Art. 54 Drilldown ansehen

Die CRISPR-Patentlandschaft ist eines der am dichtesten besetzten Biotech-Prosecution-Felder der letzten Dekade — vier grosse Assignees ringen mit unterschiedlichsten Patentfamilien um die Kernansprueche rund um Cas9, SaCas9, chRDNA und LNP-Delivery, waehrend sie gleichzeitig Art. 54(2) EPC- bzw. 35 U.S.C. §102-Novelty-Einwaende ueber Jinek 2012, Cong 2013 und Mali 2013 adressieren muessen.

Im Broad-/CVC-Interference (EP 2 800 381 B1 / US 8,697,359 B1) entschied das PTAB 2017 die Prioritaetskette pro Broad; dieselbe Anmeldung steht im Epochenschnittpunkt von Jinek 2012 als primaerer Entgegenhaltung. Intellia (WO 2017/066473, Ellis et al. 2017) verfolgt die Hepatitis-B-Therapie-Linie ueber LNP-Formulierung — eine Indikations- und Delivery-Strategie, die Cong 2013 nicht antizipiert.

Caribou (US 11,214,615 B2) beansprucht die chRDNA-Architektur — chimaire RNA-DNA-Polynukleotide mit DNA-Spacer und flankierenden RNA-Segmenten — die in Jinek 2012 nicht offenbart ist. Editas (US 10,851,155 B2) wiederum setzt auf SaCas9 mit NNGRRT-PAM und sgRNA-Laengen-Restriktion als Genus-Distinktion gegenueber SpCas9.

Die folgenden vier Karten zeigen jeweils Vorher-/Nachher-Claim-Strukturen, den zugrundeliegenden Einwand, die ClaimForge-Workflow-Schritte und den Confidence-Score — mappen Sie diese Muster auf Ihre eigene CRISPR-Prosecution ueber das Pilot-Programm.

Broad Institute / UC Berkeley

EP 2 800 381 B1 / US 8,697,359 B1 · CRISPR-Cas9 · Genome Editing · Eukaryotic Cells

CRISPR-Cas9

Before / Original Claim (excerpt)

“A method of cleaving or editing a target DNA molecule, comprising contacting said DNA molecule with a Cas9 protein and an engineered guide RNA, wherein the engineered guide RNA comprises a spacer sequence complementary to the target DNA molecule.”

After / Amended Claim (excerpt)

“A method of cleaving or editing a target DNA molecule as set forth above, wherein the engineered guide RNA is delivered as a ribonucleoprotein complex with the Cas9 protein into a eukaryotic cell, and wherein the target DNA molecule is located in the nuclear genome of the eukaryotic cell.”

Rejection	Art. 54(2) EPC novelty objection over Jinek 2012 (Science 337:816); sgRNA + Cas9 genus fully anticipated in prokaryotic systems; eukaryotic-cell scope deemed non-structural
Escape Logic	Restrict delivery to a pre-formed ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex introduced into a eukaryotic cell, with the target DNA located in the nuclear genome — a structural modality absent from any prokaryotic in vitro reference
ClaimForge Action	OA-parsing identifies Jinek 2012 anticipation of sgRNA scaffold → gap analysis surfaces RNP delivery + eukaryotic-cell restriction as non-disclosed features → amendment + re-search on RNP-delivery genus claims with Espacenet + Google Patents clearance

Confidence: 84%

Intellia Therapeutics

WO 2017/066473 (Ellis et al. 2017) · CRISPR-Cas9 · In-vivo Delivery · Liver Therapeutics

CRISPR-Cas9

Before / Original Claim (excerpt)

“A method of editing a gene in a cell, comprising administering to the cell a CRISPR-Cas9 system comprising a Cas9 protein or a nucleic acid encoding the same, and a guide RNA complementary to a target sequence in the gene.”

After / Amended Claim (excerpt)

“A method of editing a gene in a cell, wherein the CRISPR-Cas9 system comprises a Cas9 mRNA and a guide RNA formulated in a lipid nanoparticle for in vivo delivery to the liver of a subject, and wherein the gene is a hepatitis B virus (HBV) genome sequence in a hepatocyte.”

Rejection	Art. 54(2) EPC novelty objection over Cong 2013 / Mali 2013; generic sgRNA + Cas9 editing in mammalian cells fully disclosed; absence of therapeutic-use or in-vivo delivery limitation in claimed scope
Escape Logic	Restrict to in-vivo delivery via lipid nanoparticle (LNP) of a Cas9 mRNA + sgRNA formulation targeting the hepatitis B genome in hepatocytes — therapeutic indication + LNP-delivery limitation as novelty distinction supported by Ellis 2017 reduction to practice
ClaimForge Action	OA-parsing flags Cong/Mali anticipation → therapeutic-indication + LNP-delivery compound limitation added with spec anchor to Ellis 2017 reduction-to-practice → re-search confirms no prior art combines LNP-Cas9-mRNA + HBV hepatocyte targeting

Confidence: 76%

Caribou Biosciences

US 11,214,615 B2 · CRISPR-Cas Orthologs · Chimeric Guide Architecture

CRISPR-Cas Orthologs

Before / Original Claim (excerpt)

“A method of modifying a target nucleic acid in a cell, comprising contacting the target nucleic acid with a Cas9 ortholog and a guide nucleic acid, wherein the guide nucleic acid directs the Cas9 ortholog to the target nucleic acid.”

After / Amended Claim (excerpt)

“A method of modifying a target nucleic acid in a cell as set forth above, wherein the guide nucleic acid is a chimeric RNA-DNA polynucleotide (chRDNA) comprising a DNA spacer region flanked by RNA segments on the 5′ end and on the 3′ end of the chimeric polynucleotide.”

Rejection	Art. 54(2) EPC novelty objection over Jinek 2012; guide-nucleic-acid genus and Cas9 ortholog substitution anticipated at the genera level; chimeric chemical architecture of the guide not claimed as a structural element
Escape Logic	Restrict the guide-nucleic-acid genus to a chimeric RNA-DNA polynucleotide (chRDNA) comprising a DNA spacer region flanked by RNA segments on the 5′ and 3′ ends — a chemical-genus distinction absent from any 2012-era Cas9 reference
ClaimForge Action	OA-parsing isolates guide-nucleic-acid genus anticipation → chRDNA structural limitation added as a structural-genus restriction anchored to spec paragraphs on chimeric chemical composition → re-search screens Espacenet + Google Patents for pre-2012 chRDNA disclosures (none found)

Confidence: 81%

Editas Medicine

US 10,851,155 B2 · CRISPR-SaCas9 · Ortholog Restriction · AAV Delivery

CRISPR-SaCas9

Before / Original Claim (excerpt)

“A CRISPR-Cas9 system for editing a nucleic acid, comprising a Cas9 protein and a single guide RNA (sgRNA) wherein the sgRNA directs the Cas9 protein to a target nucleic acid sequence.”

After / Amended Claim (excerpt)

“A CRISPR-Cas9 system for editing a nucleic acid as set forth above, wherein the Cas9 is a Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 (SaCas9) recognising a NNGRRT protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM), and wherein the guide RNA is a single guide RNA comprising 20 to 24 nucleotides.”

Rejection	Art. 54(2) EPC novelty objection over Jinek 2012 + Ran 2015; SpCas9 genus and sgRNA length domain anticipated; SaCas9 specific PAM (NNGRRT) and sgRNA length (20–24 nt) limitations originally absent from claimed scope
Escape Logic	Restrict the Cas genus to Staphylococcus aureus Cas9 (SaCas9) recognising a NNGRRT PAM, and the guide-RNA genus to a single guide RNA of 20–24 nucleotides — ortholog + PAM + sgRNA-length compound limitation distinguishing from any SpCas9-based genus claim
ClaimForge Action	OA-parsing tags SpCas9-genus anticipation by Jinek 2012 → SaCas9 + NNGRRT-PAM + sgRNA-length compound genus restriction added with spec anchor to Ran 2015 (Science 374:711) → re-search confirms no prior SaCas9 disclosure pre-2015 dates

Confidence: 79%

Pipeline

How ClaimForge Maps Each Landscape to a Novelty-Escape Loop

Der autonome ClaimForge-Loop deckt jeden Schritt jeder der vier Escape-Strategien ab — von OA-Parsing bis Re-Search.

Step 1

OA Parsing

Reads the Art. 54(2) EPC / 35 U.S.C. §102 novelty objection and extracts primary + secondary references

Step 2

Gap Analysis

Scores each cited reference against the candidate amendment features (RNP, LNP, chRDNA, SaCas9, sgRNA length)

Step 3

Amendment Draft

Generates claim language with verbatim excerpts from the prosecution record and spec-anchor references

Step 4

Counter-Arguments

Drafts EPO/USPTO-format response addressing single-document anticipation rule (Art. 54(2) EPC)

Step 5

Re-Search

Runs Espacenet + Google Patents on amended claims to validate novelty escape against post-amendment genus

Run Your Own CRISPR Novelty Escape Loop

Upload your Art. 54 OA — ClaimForge's autonomous loop identifies which of the four escape strategies (or a combination thereof) fits your CRISPR / biotech claim set. 90 minutes vs. 20+ hours manually.

CRISPR / Biotech Patent Novelty als Demo-Szenario → 15-Min-Demo buchen CRISPR-Cas9 Art. 54 Loop →