In cherry news, 🍒 the Canadian government will be able to pursue its allegations of plant patent infringement against two US fruit companies at trial.
The US District Court (E. Wash.) denied the motion for summary judgment on Monday.
worldipreview.com/news/canada-s-…
The US District Court (E. Wash.) denied the motion for summary judgment on Monday.
worldipreview.com/news/canada-s-…
The dispute concerns #PlantPatent 20,551 (granted Dec. 15, 2009) owned by @AAFC_Canada, for a cherry tree variety named "13S2009" and sold under the trademark STACCATO. 
@AAFC_Canada The alleged infringers are counterclaiming for invalidity per the on-sale bar, 35 USC §102(b).
They offered evidence of "growing contracts" between nurseries and AAFC to supply scions of varieties (including STACCATO), made more than one year before applying for the plant patent
They offered evidence of "growing contracts" between nurseries and AAFC to supply scions of varieties (including STACCATO), made more than one year before applying for the plant patent
The alleged infringers obtained #PlantPatent 22,693 in 2012 for a cherry tree named "Goodwin", sold under the name "GLORY".
But @AAFC_Canada argues that "GLORY" is, in fact, "STACCATO" and rightfully belongs to the Canadian government.
But @AAFC_Canada argues that "GLORY" is, in fact, "STACCATO" and rightfully belongs to the Canadian government.
On that basis, @AAFC_Canada also argues there have been violations of the Lanham Act due to false use of the name “Glory” to identify Staccato® cherry trees and fruit (i.e. reverse passing off under 15 USC §1125(a))
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
