DNA sequencing used to be a slog. Honestly, it was a mess of chemical reactions and massive machines that looked like they belonged in a 1970s mainframe room. Then came nanopores. If you’ve been following the biotech space at all, you know that the MspA nanopore sequencing US patent application represents one of those rare "aha!" moments in molecular biology that actually made it out of the lab and into the real world.
We aren't just talking about a minor upgrade here. It’s a total shift in how we read the code of life.
Historically, the problem with nanopore sequencing wasn't the "nanopore" part—it was the "pore" itself. Early attempts used alpha-hemolysin, a protein from Staphylococcus aureus. It worked, sure. But it was like trying to read a newspaper through a foggy window while running at sixty miles per hour. The "sensing zone" was too long. It read too many nucleotides at once, making the signal a garbled mess.
Then along came MspA.
What exactly is MspA and why does the patent matter?
MspA stands for Mycobacterium smegmatis porin A. It’s a channel protein. In its natural habitat, it helps the bacterium take in nutrients. But for researchers like Jens Gundlach at the University of Washington—whose work forms the backbone of the MspA nanopore sequencing US patent application—it was the perfect tool for a different job.
The shape is the secret sauce. While other pores are long and cylindrical, MspA is shaped like a funnel. It has a tiny, narrow constriction point that is only about 1.2 nanometers wide and, crucially, very short.
Think about it this way.
If you're trying to identify individual beads on a string as they pull through a hole, you want the hole to be as thin as possible. If the hole is thick, you’re looking at five beads at once. If it’s thin, you see one. MspA’s "sensing zone" is so short that the electrical current change is dominated by basically a single nucleotide. That's the breakthrough. That is what the patent applications, particularly those involving the University of Washington and later partnerships with companies like Illumina or Oxford Nanopore (though the legal history there is a tangled web of lawsuits), were trying to lock down.
The patenting of these biological "nanogates" created a massive stir in the intellectual property world. It wasn't just about the protein itself; it was about the modifications to the protein. Nature didn't make MspA perfect for DNA. Scientists had to go in and swap out amino acids—specifically, replacing negatively charged ones in the constriction site with neutral ones so the DNA wouldn't get stuck.
The legal tug-of-war you probably missed
Intellectual property in biotech is basically a contact sport.
When the MspA nanopore sequencing US patent application hit the desk of examiners, it wasn't entering a vacuum. You had competing interests everywhere. On one side, you have the academic pioneers who discovered that MspA could actually resolve single nucleotides. On the other, you have billion-dollar corporations trying to integrate these pores into handheld devices.
The patent landscape for MspA is a mess of "method" patents and "composition" patents. Some cover the specific mutated version of the pore (like the MspA-NNN mutant). Others cover the method of using a motor protein—like a polymerase or a helicase—to zip the DNA through the pore at a speed the electronics can actually record.
Without that motor protein? The DNA flies through at a million bases per second. Too fast. You'd see nothing.
The patent applications detail how these two biological components—the MspA funnel and the motor protein "brake"—work in tandem. If you own the rights to that interaction, you basically own the future of decentralized medicine. It's that big.
Why this isn't just "nerd stuff" for lab rats
You might be wondering why a patent application from years ago is still driving the news cycle in 2026.
It’s because MspA solved the accuracy problem that almost killed nanopore sequencing in its infancy. Because MspA can distinguish between a Cytosine and a Methyl-Cytosine without any complex chemical pretreatment (like bisulfite sequencing, which is basically acid-washing your DNA), it opened the door to "epigenetics."
Epigenetics is the study of how your environment changes how your genes are expressed. It’s the difference between having the "blueprints" for a house and knowing which rooms actually have the lights turned on. MspA-based sequencing lets us see the "light switches" in real-time.
Current tech based on these patents allows for:
- Detecting cancers from a simple blood draw by looking at methylation patterns.
- Identifying pathogens in the field (literally in a jungle or a desert) in minutes.
- Sequencing "ultra-long" reads of DNA that tell us about structural variations in the genome that older tech (like Illumina’s short-read machines) totally misses.
Honestly, the MspA nanopore sequencing US patent application is the reason we're moving toward a world where your doctor might have a sequencer in their pocket.
The hurdles that still remain
It’s not all sunshine and perfect data.
Even with MspA, the "noise" in the signal is high. You’re measuring pico-amps of current. To put that in perspective, that’s about a trillionth of the current running through a standard lightbulb. Anything can interfere with that. Temperature, salt concentration, or even a tiny vibration.
Furthermore, the longevity of these biological pores is a sticking point. They’re proteins. They’re fragile. They don't love being stuck in a synthetic membrane for weeks on end. This is why many recent patent filings are focusing on "solid-state" nanopores—pores etched into silicon or graphene—that try to mimic the MspA shape but with the durability of a computer chip.
But so far? Nature’s design, modified by human hands, is still winning.
Navigating the Patent Data
If you actually go and dig through the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) filings, look for references to "Modified MspA nanopores" and "polynucleotide sequencing." You’ll see names like Derrington, Butler, and Gundlach.
✨ Don't miss: Is Instagram Owned by Meta? What Most People Get Wrong
These documents aren't just dry legal text. They are the instruction manuals for the next generation of healthcare. They describe the exact mutations needed to make the pore "quiet" enough to read DNA. They explain how to use "phi29 polymerase" as a molecular motor to pull the strand through.
Actionable insights for the curious
If you're an investor, a researcher, or just someone who wants to know where their healthcare is going, here is how you should actually use this information.
First, stop looking at sequencing as a "one and done" market. The MspA nanopore sequencing US patent application proves that the value isn't just in the machine; it's in the pore architecture. Keep an eye on companies that are licensing these specific protein structures.
Second, watch the litigation. When you see a "Notice of Allowance" for a patent involving MspA mutations, it usually means a new product launch is around the corner.
Finally, understand the "read length" advantage. If you are involved in genomic research, prioritize MspA-based nanopore tech for any project involving complex repeats or structural variants. Short-read sequencing is great for some things, but it’s like trying to assemble a 10,000-piece puzzle of a clear blue sky. MspA gives you the big pieces that actually make sense.
How to track this tech moving forward
- Monitor the USPTO "Pair" System: Search for "University of Washington" and "MspA" to see the latest continuations of the original patent filings.
- Differentiate between Biological and Solid-State: If a company claims nanopore tech, check if they are using MspA-derivative proteins or synthetic holes. MspA is currently the gold standard for resolution.
- Look for "Direct RNA" Sequencing: One of the coolest things hidden in the MspA patent family is the ability to sequence RNA directly without converting it to cDNA first. This is a game changer for virus tracking.
The MspA story is far from over. As these patents expire or get extended through new "claims," the cost of sequencing will continue to drop. We're heading toward the $10 genome, and we’re riding on the back of a tiny bacterial protein to get there.