Editas Medicine, Inc.
For the period ended Sep 30, 2026. Filed Nov 9, 2026.
View on SEC.govAbout this filing
A company's report for each of its first three quarters. The financial statements are not audited. It shows how the business has moved since the last annual report, and what management says changed.
Sep 30, 2026 · Filed Nov 9, 2026
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-Q
Period ended 2026-06-30; filed 2026-08-05.
0001650664-26-000083
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-Q
Period ended 2026-09-30; filed 2026-11-09.
0001650664-26-000103
Item 1A. Risk FactorsThe baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.
Compared 13 previous paragraphs and 13 current paragraphs.
12 unchanged; 1 reworded; 0 added; 0 removed; 0 previous and 0 current paragraphs rearranged.
Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.
A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.
Reworded paragraphs (1)
Previous wording
On September 10, 2020, the PTAB granted Broad’s motion for priority benefit while denying CVC priority benefit to their two earliest provisional patent applications. As a result, Broad entered the priority phase of the interference as “Senior Party” while CVC remained the “Junior Party” for purposes of determining which entity was the first to invent the inventions at issue. On February 28, 2022, the PTAB issued a decision regarding the priority phase of the interference determining that Broad was the first entity to invent the claims at issue. This decision was appealed by CVC and the Broad cross-appealed. On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part the PTAB’s previous decision and remanded it back to the PTAB for further review. On March 26, 2026, the PTAB reaffirmed its previous decision favoring Broad. This decision by the PTAB has been appealed by CVC. It is uncertain when or in what manner the CAFC will act on this appeal.
Current wording
On September 10, 2020, the PTAB granted Broad’s motion for priority benefit while denying CVC priority benefit to their two earliest provisional patent applications. As a result, Broad entered the priority phase of the interference as “Senior Party” while CVC remained the “Junior Party” for purposes of determining which entity was the first to invent the inventions at issue. On February 28, 2022, the PTAB issued a decision regarding the priority phase of the interference determining that Broad was the first entity to invent the claims at issue. This decision was appealed by CVC and the Broad cross-appealed. On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed-in-part and vacated-in-part the PTAB’s previous decision and remanded it back to the PTAB for further review. On March 26, 2026, the PTAB reaffirmed its previous decision favoring Broad. This decision by the PTAB has been appealed to the CAFC by CVC. It is uncertain when or in what manner the CAFC will act on this appeal.