Fate Therapeutics, Inc. v. Shoreline Biosciences, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaFebruary 13, 20233:22-cv-00676California920 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 FATE THERAPEUTICS, INC.; and Case No.: 22-cv-00676-H-MSB

WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE FOR

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, ORDER REQUIRING

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON Plaintiffs,

DEFENDANT SHORELINE’S

14 v. MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHORELINE BIOSCIENCES, INC.; and

DAN S. KAUFMAN, Defendants. 18 On January 27, 2023, Defendant Shoreline Biosciences, Inc. (“Shoreline”) filed a 19 motion for partial summary judgment. (Doc. No. 127.) In the motion, Shoreline argues 20 that it is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of whether 28 U.S.C. § 1498 bars 21 Plaintiffs from suing Shoreline under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) based on the induced pluripotent 22 stem cell (“iPSC”) line manufactured by Lonza Walkersville, Inc. (“Lonza”) and sold to 23 Shoreline by the National Institute of Health (“NIH”). (Id. at 1, 6-11.) A hearing on 24 Shoreline’s motion for summary judgment is currently scheduled for Monday,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.