Defendants avoid trial after prevailing on non-infringement and non-enablement motions

Posted on January 16, 2007 by Morris James LLP

Monsanto Company et al. v. Syngenta Seeds, Inc., et al., C.A. 04-305-SLR, May 10, 2006.

Robinson, J.  Defendants’ motions for summary judgment of non-infringement of two patents-in-suit, and non-enablement of the third patent were granted.  Other motions denied as moot.

The disputed technology relates to GA21 corn, a transgenic corn product tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate.  Because plaintiff and not the accused infringer performed steps (i)-(iii) of the claims, defendants cannot be liable for infringing those claims or any claims dependant on those independent claims.  Under the “all elements” rule, each of the claimed steps of a patented process must be performed in an infringing process.  Clearly plaintiff did not infringe when it performed the first three steps.

The non-enablement motion centers around whether monocots and dicots must be enabled when the claim is directed to a gene that functions in a plant cell.  Plaintiffs cannot avoid the enabling requirement by claiming a gene that functions in plant cells rather than claiming plants transformed by a gene.

Tags: ,
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://depatentlaw.morrisjames.com/admin/trackback/126610
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.