Corteva and Inari settle major seed-IP dispute after DOJ statement of interest

Corteva Agriscience and Inari Agriculture have settled a closely watched intellectual property dispute in Delaware after the case went to trial, bringing proceedings over access to Corteva’s patented biological material to an apparent end.

The parties filed a joint motion to dismiss with prejudice on September 27 after reaching a settlement and release agreement. Most of the settlement terms are confidential, but a proposed dismissal order sets out significant obligations concerning Corteva biological material held by Inari.

Under the proposed order, Inari must destroy, or cause to be destroyed, all Corteva biological and restricted materials in its possession, custody or control, including seeds, plants, plant parts, tissue cultures, and DNA samples. The destruction must be completed within 30 days, after which Inari must provide a declaration confirming that the materials have been destroyed.

The proposed dismissal order had not yet been entered by US District Judge John F. Murphy as of September 28.

Dispute over access to patented seeds

Corteva filed the lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Delaware in September 2023, accusing Inari of infringing its intellectual property rights through the alleged acquisition and use of protected seed material.

The case involved a combination of utility patent, Plant Variety Protection, contract, and other claims. Corteva alleged that Inari obtained protected seeds from a biological depository, transported them outside the United States, and used them for genome editing and other purposes. The dispute centered in part on Corteva’s deposits of protected biological material with the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) in connection with its patent applications.

Inari disputed Corteva’s allegations and maintained that its activities involved permissible research. The question of how patented biological material deposited for purposes of patent disclosure may be accessed and used became one of the most closely watched aspects of the litigation.

The case went to trial on September 23, after extensive pretrial proceedings. Judge Murphy had issued a series of rulings on the parties’ summary judgment and expert-evidence motions in the weeks preceding trial.

DOJ raised competition and innovation concerns

The litigation attracted additional attention in May, when the US Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division filed a statement of interest. The DOJ said the case raised issues concerning the public’s ability to access and read patented biological material, which it said promotes follow-on innovation and competition in the seeds industry.

The department emphasized that the patent system requires inventors to disclose their inventions in exchange for patent protection, and argued that the public’s ability to understand claimed inventions is important to follow-on innovation. The DOJ also highlighted the concentration and barriers to entry in the US seed industry, arguing that reasonable access to patented seeds can be important for new entrants and smaller businesses.

Importantly, however, the DOJ did not take a position on the ultimate disposition of the case. Its filing addressed the legal principles surrounding access to patented biological material rather than asking the court to rule for either Corteva or Inari.

More than $1.3 billion reportedly at stake

The settlement also means the jury will not issue a final damages determination in the dispute. According to reporting during the trial, Corteva was seeking more than $446 million in damages for alleged patent infringement, as well as approximately $877 million in connection with unfair competition and breach-of-contract claims. Those figures represented Corteva’s claimed damages and were not awarded by the court or jury.

With the parties now seeking dismissal with prejudice, there will be no substantive trial judgment resolving the broader question of how patented biological material deposited with a public depository may be accessed and used for research and follow-on innovation. That leaves an important issue for the agricultural biotechnology sector unresolved: where the line falls between permissible access to deposited biological material and conduct that infringes the rights associated with that material.

For now, the immediate outcome of the dispute will instead be governed by the parties’ confidential settlement agreement and the proposed order requiring the destruction of Corteva’s biological and restricted materials.

The case remains formally pending until the court enters the proposed dismissal order.

← Back to News