Connolly Bove Plant Sciences Attorneys
As the world’s population continues to grow, climate changes and diminishing resources are threatening our environment and those inhabiting it. Agriscience and plant sciences businesses are increasingly challenged to devise methods to protect crops against pests and diseases, provide safer, varied, affordable, and healthy diets, and develop new technologies to grow more crops per acre/hectare, and create new crops and seed with novel traits. Connolly Bove’s Plant Sciences group, comprised of biotech attorneys with the full range of IP experience, guides our plant sciences industry clients, providing them with the legal and business advice they need, related to their efforts with renewable resources such as fiber, biofuel and other bioproducts such as nutriceuticals and biopolymers. We are there to assist as our clients continue to develop innovative practices for sustainable production to preserve soil, water and natural habitats.
The business, technical and intellectual property protection challenges require a thorough understanding of the agriscience industry and underlying technology and sciences, areas in which our attorneys excel. With a team comprised of scientifically astute, industry experienced legal professionals, Connolly Bove is highly qualified to serve the Plant Sciences community.
IP Smart
Many of Our Plant Sciences Attorneys Have Advanced Degrees that Strengthen Our Plant Sciences Practice.
Connolly Bove attorneys and patent agents have degrees in the critical sciences, including biochemistry, biotechnology, chemistry and chemical engineering. Many of our biotech patent attorneys have advanced degrees in industry specific areas like plant biology, plant pathology, agronomy, entomology, horticulture, plant molecular and cell biology, plant physiology, plant breeding, classical and molecular genetics, plant genetic engineering, gene cloning, plant expression systems and vectors. Many of our biotechnology attorneys have conducted postdoctoral plant and agricultural research, held agricultural government positions and served as in-house counsel in the agricultural products industry.
Our attorneys are highly experienced in providing legal counsel related to a wide array of scientific areas, including:
- Manipulation of gene expression, transformation and regeneration of crop plants
- Cloning genes through screening using cDNA libraries, RACE, RT-PCR
- Characterization of mutants, analysis of transgenic plants by various methods, including gel plots and PCR, natural products including plant extracts, pharmaceutically active compounds, nutritional supplements, flavorings, regulation of cell function at the molecular and cellular levels, and function of metabolic pathways
- Plant function regulators suitable for enhancing ripening, decreasing crop moisture, and/or for avoidance of lodging
- Plant biology
- Crop tolerance and environmental impact studies
- Bioherbicides, herbicide compositions and functions, related chemicals and their formulations for agriculture
- Herbicides suitable for organic agriculture and horticulture, and microbial production of chemicals
Our breadth of knowledge and scientific expertise enable us to enhance our clients’ opportunities for growth and to protect their biotechnology intellectual property and business interests.
Business Savvy
Our Plant Sciences Attorneys Understand Intellectual Property Issues as They Relate to Your Business.
Our attorneys provide an interdisciplinary approach to address our clients’ intellectual property needs. Our global biotechnology lawyers continually monitor the development of new rules and regulations and advise clients on how such regulations may affect their businesses. Having worked in the industry, we bring an insider’s perspective on agricultural business operations, development and innovation. Team attorneys provide guidance on global intellectual property and patent strategy, managing client portfolios throughout the world.
We actively advise our clients in the following areas:
- Preparing and prosecuting patent applications worldwide
- Drafting and negotiating licensing and R&D agreements
- Conducting due diligence investigations and risk assessment and management
- Providing patentability, validity, infringement and freedom to operate opinions
- Handling patent term extension and restoration, reissue and reexamination
- Conducting intellectual property audits
- Enforcing intellectual property rights, including patents, trademarks and trade secrets
- Drafting, negotiating and enforcing noncompete agreements and collaborative development agreements
- Counselling with respect to biotech patent infringement, protection and interference
- Competitors’ patents and applications
Operating globally means that we can assist our clients with procurement of domestic and international patents, trademarks and standards integration, handle technology transfers and licensing needs, and assure that trade secrecy is maintained. We work with all of our clients to develop unique legal and business strategies structured around their specific intellectual properties. We maintain a strong presence and regular dialog with those in the IP industry and participate in USPTO Partnership Customer meetings and regular interviews with Examiners, Supervisory Examiners and Quality Assurance Specialists, so that we are well informed about the latest USPTO trends and policies for portfolio management and strategic planning.
Client Connected®
Our Plant Sciences Attorneys Find Advantages for Our Clients.
Large and small corporate clients ranging from well-established entities to start-up companies, including plant manufacturers and laboratories come to us because of our longstanding U.S. patent experience, including our knowledge of the pitfalls of claim construction and claim drafting techniques, and our ability to understand and work with new technology, assimilate complex, multifaceted business issues, and clearly and persuasively communicate when advising on how to proceed with intellectual property, licensing and patent strategies. We provide an insider’s perspective on plant sciences development, innovation and regulation. Our advanced technical skills and scientific acumen mean that we understand our clients’ business needs and concerns, and are able to take on the challenges they face efficiently and cost-effectively.
We enjoy handling our clients’ legal challenges so that they can focus on their research, development and business growth.
Representative Matters
Prevailed on behalf of client Bayer Crop Science (BCS) in a Federal Circuit patent interference appeal involving the application of 35 U.S.C. 112’s written description requirements in the context of a claimed invention comprising transgenic cotton. The Court affirmed the Board's determination that Adang's narrowly drawn specification did not support the addition of later claims to provoke interference, and found that Adang's reference to another application relating to transgenic cotton in its specification was not a valid incorporation by reference. Adang v. Umbeck, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 25198 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 25, 2007).
Successfully prosecuted reissue of the Rhone-Poulenc patent, which was the subject of a $65 million jury verdict; offered opinions and counselling on validity and infringement of plant related patents. Rhone-Poulenc Agro, S.A. v. Monsanto Co. and DeKalb Genetics Corp., 73 F. Supp. 2d 554 (M.D.N.C. 1999).
Obtained a $65 million jury verdict on behalf of Rhone-Poulenc Agro S.A. (now Aventis CropScience S.A.) on a claim for fraudulent procurement of a license under a patent for bioengineering of crops. A second jury found the Rhone-Poulenc patent enforceable and infringed, resulting in a separate confidential damage settlement. In 2000, the trial court affirmed these verdicts in response to post-trial motions, and the case was appealed to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the verdicts and ruled in favor of Rhone-Poulenc Agro on all issues and denied the defendant's bona fide purchaser defense. Rhone-Poulenc Agro, S.A. v. DeKalb Genetics Corp., 272 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2001). The Federal Circuit affirmed the $50 million punitive damages award in Rhone-Poulenc Agro, S.A. v. DeKalb Genetics Corp., 345 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2003). The preliminary decisions are reported in 73 F. Supp. 2d 554 (M.D.N.C. 1999); 73 F. Supp. 2d 540 (M.D.N.C. 1999); and 73 F. Supp. 2d 537 (M.D.N.C. 1999). Rhone-Poulenc Agro S.A. v. Monsanto Co. and DeKalb Genetics Corp., No. 1:97CV1138 (M.D.N.C. 2000).
Obtained a $65 million jury verdict on behalf of Rhone-Poulenc Agro S.A. (now Aventis CropScience S.A.) on a claim for fraudulent procurement of a license under a patent for bioengineering of crops. A second jury found the Rhone-Poulenc patent enforceable and infringed, resulting in a separate confidential damage settlement. In 2000, the trial court affirmed these verdicts in response to post-trial motions, and the case was appealed to the Federal Circuit, which affirmed the verdicts and ruled in favor of Rhone-Poulenc Agro on all issues and denied the defendant's bona fide purchaser defense. Rhone-Poulenc Agro, S.A. v. DeKalb Genetics Corp., 272 F.3d 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2001). The Federal Circuit affirmed the $50 million punitive damages award in Rhone-Poulenc Agro, S.A. v. DeKalb Genetics Corp., 345 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2003). The preliminary decisions are reported in 73 F. Supp. 2d 554 (M.D.N.C. 1999); 73 F. Supp. 2d 540 (M.D.N.C. 1999); and 73 F. Supp. 2d 537 (M.D.N.C. 1999). Rhone-Poulenc Agro S.A. v. Monsanto Co. and DeKalb Genetics Corp., No. 1:97CV1138 (M.D.N.C. date).Obtained a favorable jury verdict following a trial concerning two patents held by DeKalb scientists relating to corn seed that is resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in a widely used herbicide. The jury concluded that Rhone-Poulenc's researchers should also be named as co-inventors on the patents. With the addition of the Rhone-Poulenc scientists, the patents no longer precluded our client Aventis CropScience from producing its own herbicide-resistant corn seed. Rhone-Poulenc Agro S.A. v. Monsanto Co. and DeKalb Genetics Corp., 445 F. Supp. 2d 531 (M.D.N.C. 2006).
Successfully represented Bayer CropScience SA before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in a case addressing and applying the Board's rules governing the admissibility of evidence and objections to evidence. Bayer had presented certain evidence in partially redacted form and Syngenta moved the Board for discovery seeking to require Bayer to produce unredacted versions of the evidence. Denying Syngenta's motion, the Board reviewed the applicable rules and standards, and found that Syngenta's surmises as to the nature of the redacted evidence was insufficient to carry Syngenta's burden of showing entitlement to discovery. The decision is exemplary of decisions illustrating the difficulty of obtaining leave for discovery from the Board. Bayer CropScience SA v. Syngenta Limited, 78 U.S.P.Q.2d 1797 (BPAI 2005).
Successfully handled a Patent Appeals Board case for an international chemical client resulting in the protection of a protein purification and isolation patent.
Advised an international chemical client with $1 billion in annual sales on how to establish an in-house intellectual property strategy.
Resources