• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

EPA revokes Bayer’s biopatent on broccoli

20. November 2018

The European Patent Office (EPO) has revoked Bayer AG’s controversial Monsanto biopatent, which was intended to protect the breeding of broccoli to facilitate harvesting. It is the first revocation of a biopatent since the introduction of the newly revised EU regulation for biopatents in 2017.

Biopatent broccoliPatent EP 1 597 965, granted in 2013 to Monsanto, an agrochemical company acquired by Bayer in the meantime, covers broccoli plants that grow slightly higher and can therefore be harvested more easily. It has also become known as the “patent on decapitated broccoli. The revocation followed an objection raised by a coalition of organizations in 2014. Since an updated regulation in 2017, patents on plants and animals may no longer be granted if they result from common breeding methods such as crossing and selection.

Biopatent and the legal situation until 2017

In principle, the legal situation for biopatents is shaped by the European Patent Convention (EPC, Article 53, letter b), which was signed in 1973 – long before the genetic and biotechnological possibilities that exist today. Decisions were based on the EU Biopatent Directive (Directive 98/44/EC). However, in view of the fact that the EPO has already granted more than 1,000 biopatents, it has become increasingly urgent to adapt the legal requirements to modern technological methods.

With the question of how the EPC should be interpreted with regard to its regulations on the patentability of plants, the EPO’s Board of Appeal issued fundamental decisions in 2010 and 2015, in the so-called cases Broccoli I and Tomato I or Broccoli II and Tomato II. It stated that conventional breeding methods and marker-assisted selection may not be patented. However, plants and animals derived from such breeding should still be patentable as biopatents (decisions G02/12 and G02/13 (Broccoli II)). Technical process components used, such as a molecular marker, can also be patented as such.

Germany always regards the legal area of biopatents very sensitively and regarded the EU requirements as insufficient. In 2013 the German Patent Act was amended by 2a (1) No. 1 Patent Act. In contrast to the European patent, this clearly states that patents on plants and animals from conventional breeding are explicitly excluded.

2017 revised new EU regulation on biopatents

At the EU level, there were political negotiations to reach an EU-wide convergence in the assessment of biopatents. This led to the EPO’s revised regulation on biopatents in 2017 – we reported. If crossing and selection take place, patentability of the resulting plants and animals will also be excluded. Mutations, however, should remain patentable. In practical terms, this means that the broccoli patent of Plant Bioscience Limited, referred to as Broccoli II in the fundamental decision of 2015, would no longer be granted today. For this reason, European biopatents already granted since autumn 2017 are being re-examined. The deadline is November 2016: all biopatents granted by the EPO since November 2016 are reviewed by the EPO.

Patent protection through product-by-process claims

However, genetic engineering interventions are of course commonplace in plants and microorganisms. It is mainly technical selection procedures or product-by-process claims that provide patent protection.

A product-by-process claim is a characteristic of a product that is the subject of a claim, which is characterized by the characteristics of the process used to manufacture it.

It must be impossible to define the claimed product differently from its manufacturing process (e.g. starting materials or treatment processes). And, of course, the claimed product must meet patentability requirements.

In patent law, product-by-process claims are not easy to obtain. This is because § 9 sentence 2 no. 3 PatG already provides for direct product protection by law, even for a claim obtained through a process patent.

(Quoted and translated from IP Wikipedia www.legal-patent.com)

Biopatent on malting barley not revoked

Not surprisingly, a second prominent revocation procedure before the European Patent Office was decided at the beginning of October. The beer groups Heineken and Carlsberg were granted patent protection for conventionally bred malting barley by the European Patent Office (Patent EP 2384110). More than 30 environmental organisations appealed against the decision. In their opinion, a genetic predisposition was considered an invention in this patent, although it had arisen accidentally and the plants originated from conventional breeding. After a public hearing at the beginning of October, the controversial patent was restricted but not revoked.

The patent originally covered all plants lacking certain unwanted flavourings. “The patent description reads “FIRST WITH REDUCED LIPOXYGENASE ACTIVITY”. With its decision, the EPO now limited the patent to plants with certain mutations that can influence the formation of these flavors. Opposition to this decision has already been announced, so the proceedings against this patent are likely to continue.

This may also be interesting in this context:

  • ECJ ruling: Mutagenesis is among genetic engineering
  • Next step in Battle over CRISPR technology: EPO revokes important patent

 

Do you need support in patent protection for biotechnological, genetic or chemical processes?

We would be pleased to support you with the necessary research and correct registration of your trademark. Please take your chance and contact us.

Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.

CAT-call_en

Sources:

EPO Register Revocation of Broccoli Patent

EPO Press release 2017: practice in the area of plant and animal patents

Opposition against barley patent

Picture:

jackmac34 /pixabay.com / CCO License  

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconHealthcare & Lifesciences,  Patent Law Tag iconbarley,  Bayer,  Biopatent,  biopatents,  Board of Appeal,  Carlsberg,  EPO,  genetic engineering,  Germany,  Heineken,  Monsanto,  Patent,  patent on plants,  plants,  Product-by-Process,  revised regulation on biopatents,  revocation

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Healthcare & Lifesciences

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

7. March 2022
BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt

BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

22. February 2022
PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

PAP is in force: UPC possible in 2022

8. February 2022
Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

Germany: Value in dispute and costs in proceedings

3. February 2022
PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

PCT application – does the principle of joint applicants apply?

1. February 2022
Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

Proof of patent infringement by whistleblower

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.