Guardant'ın DNA dizilimi patent anlaşmazlığı için 245 milyon $ ödemesi emredildi

Guardant ordered to pay $245m in DNA sequencing patent dispute

Tue, August 25, 2026 at 2:36 PM GMT+3 4 min read

• GH -4.40%

A US court has ordered Guardant Health to pay TwinStrand Biosciences and the University of Washington (UW) $245.2m after upholding a November 2023 jury verdict that found the company liable for infringing on patented DNA sequencing technologies.

The US District Court of Columbia's judgement ends a complaint TwinStrand filed in August 2021, asserting that Guardant infringed on two core patents underlying TwinStrand's and UW's Duplex Sequencing technology.

Duplex Sequencing is a form of next-generation DNA sequencing technology that the Washington-based company asserts can achieve more than 10,000-fold greater accuracy than conventional sequencing methods. The technology was originally invented and developed at UW, with TwinStrand spinning out from the university in 2015.

The patent infringements for this technology were determined to span 11 of Guardant's products and services, including its Guardant360 CDx comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) assay for detecting tumour DNA mutations in patients with advanced solid cancer.

In judge Gregory Williams' final ruling, Guardant has been ordered to pay TwinStrand and UW $245.2m, a figure combining damages, accrued royalties and interest for infringement. The figure marks an increase on the $83m verdict from November 2023.

TwinStrand's board chair, Chad Waite, said: "Duplex Sequencing solved an accuracy problem the sequencing field had worked on for years, and this judgment affirms the jury's finding that Guardant Health built products on that invention without a license.

"We remained steadfast in our conviction that the facts would prevail, and they have. We intend to see this through and stand firmly behind the intellectual property at the core of our technology."

Guardant has rejected the court's decision and plans to appeal.

"We strongly disagree with this decision and will promptly be appealing for its overturn," said John Saia, Guardant's chief legal officer.

The most troubling part of the judgement for Guardant likely exists in the stipulates regarding accrued royalties. Of the $245.2m penalty, $119.4m applies to royalties accrued for sales of the 11 infringing products between 5 February 2024 and 31 May 2026 – a figure determined on the basis of a 6% levy applied to a $1.39bn revenue base throughout this period.

Going forward, however, Guardant has also been ordered to keep paying the 6% royalty on sales of the covered products and services from 1 June 2026 through the patents' expiration on 15 March 2033 to TwinStrand and UW on a quarterly basis.

The court's ruling was disclosed ahead of market open on 24 August. Guardant's shares, listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange, fell 3.6% at market open to $164.62, down from $170.69 previously. Guardant has a market cap of $21.9bn.

William Blair analysts said in a research note: "While a negative headline, we don't think this meaningfully changes the path from here as the increased judgment [from November 2023] reflects the passage of time rather than a change in court ruling".

Stating that it remained confident that it did not infringe the asserted patents, Guardant highlighted that the court order limited the scope of royalties to products that existed at the time of the trial in 2023, many of which "have been discontinued or significantly upgraded."

Based on Guardant's updated technology, therefore, it asserts that the current versions of Guardant Reveal and Shield should be excluded from the order. Meanwhile, the company stated it had validated design improvements to Guardant360 and related services that would further exclude impact of the 6% royalty stipulation contained in the court's decision.

Saia added: "We have full faith in the strengths and merits of Guardant's intellectual property and R&D and are confident we will ultimately prevail on appeal."

"Guardant ordered to pay $245m in DNA sequencing patent dispute" was originally created and published by Medical Device Network, a GlobalData owned brand.