In a dramatic legal showdown at the Delaware federal court, genetic-testing powerhouse Natera emerged victorious on Friday, persuading a jury that its competitor, CareDx, had infringed upon one of its patents with their kidney-transplant rejection tests, AlloSure and AlloSeq.
The courtroom, normally bustling with legal battles, stood silent as the jury reached the decision, determining that CareDx’s tests violated Natera’s intellectual property related to the use of cell-free DNA in assessing the risk of kidney transplant rejection. Now, the jury faces the task of determining the monetary damages owed by CareDx to the victorious Natera.
Brisbane-based CareDx, acknowledging the infringement on one of Natera’s patents, awaits the end of the trial to provide further commentary. Meanwhile, speculations arise as Natera seeks over $149 million in lost profits, according to a court brief filed on Friday.
This legal triumph for Natera comes after a week-long trial that further deepens the rivalry between the two companies. CareDx, having previously secured a $45 million jury award against Natera in 2022 for false advertising, faced setbacks when the award was dismissed by a Delaware judge last year. Although the judge affirmed Natera’s misleading advertising claims, asserting that Prospera tests were superior to AlloSure, the award was nullified.
In a separate case, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt CareDx another blow by rejecting its bid to revive patents that it had accused Natera of infringing. The legal saga continues, shaping the landscape of the genetic-testing industry.
Following the announcement of the verdict, CareDx’s stock price plummeted by more than 17%, underscoring the significant impact of the decision on the company’s financial standing. The fallout is poised to reshape the dynamics of the competitive market, with Natera solidifying its position as a key player in genetic testing.
As the legal battle unfolds, the eyes of the industry are fixed on the ongoing case, marked as Natera Inc v. CareDx Inc, U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, No. 1:20-cv-00038. Legal experts predict that the ramifications of this landmark verdict will reverberate throughout the genetic-testing sector, influencing future innovations and patent disputes.
