Illumina To Purchase Pacific Biosciences
Illumina, a DNA sequencing company, will purchase competitor Pacific Biosciences (“Pacific”) for $1.2 billion (USD) in an all cash-transaction. This price represents a premium of 71% to Pacific’s 30 trading day volume weighted average share price as of the market close on October 31, 2018. The deal is expected to close in mid-2019.
Illumina is the company behind the machines that companies such as 23andMe and Ancestry rely on for their sequencing. The deal, made in an effort to corner the market in cutting-edge genetic research, is the largest Illumina has ever made. Illumina already had a market capitalization of $46 billion before the deal. According to Illumina’s chief executive officer, Francis deSouza, this deal should lead to further growth and, eventually, a “more perfect view of the genome”.
This move could allow Illumina to continue to dominate this industry space, as it will now have even fewer competitors. Some experts have opined that, since Pacific uses a different method to read strands of DNA, the acquisition of Pacific may fill a gap in Illumina’s current technology. Specifically, Pacific uses technology that looks at much longer strands of DNA known as “long reads,” whereas Illumina’s technology focuses on “short reads.” Long read technology, which is critical in developing a better understanding of diseases, can help to cover the gaps left by short read technology. For example, short read technology is often not as effective in certain applications including de novo sequencing and the sequencing of highly homologous regions of genomes.
This acquisition will open up the doors to significantly more research on these “long reads”. Michael Hunkapiller, Ph. D. and chief executive officer of Pacific, stated that “Illumina continues to democratize the use of sequencing at an unprecedented rate. Through this combination, thousands of researchers will now have direct access to this technology”.
These complementary technologies, once integrated, may offer customers deeper insight and understanding of their genetics.
Author: Abid Khalid
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@luvqs
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…