Kraft Foods Global Brands LLC has filed a complaint in an Illinois federal court against Kellogg and Keebler, claiming that the companies’ cookie packaging infringes resealable food container patents that Kraft owns. Kraft Foods Global Brands LLC v. Kellogg N. Am. Co., No. 13 321 (N.D. Ill., filed January 16, 2013). According to the complaint, the infringing products involve the defendants’ Keebler Sandies® line of products, including shortbread, pecan shortbread and dark chocolate almond cookies. Kraft alleges that it informed the defendants of the infringement during an August 2012 meeting, but despite that knowledge, “Defendants continue to commit acts of infringement.” Kraft seeks injunctive relief, destruction of infringing products, an accounting, damages, a determination that the case is “exceptional,” attorney’s fees, costs, and interest.
Tag Archives patent
Indiana farmer Vernon Bowman claims in his U.S. Supreme Court merits brief that the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that he infringed patents by planting second-generation genetically modified (GM) seeds, has “significantly curtailed the patent-exhaustion defense” by refusing to “hold Monsanto’s patent rights exhausted with respect to the seeds Bowman purchased from [a] grain elevator.” Bowman v. Monsanto Co., No. 11-796 (U.S., petitioner’s brief filed December 3, 2012). The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review whether “the Federal Circuit erred by (1) refusing to find patent exhaustion in patented seeds even after an authorized sale, and by (2) creating an exception to the doctrine of patent exhaustion for self-replicating technologies.” Additional information about the dispute appears in Issue 434 of this Update. The allegedly infringing seeds that Bowman planted as a second crop were purchased in a commodity grain mix from a grain elevator. Such mixes can, according to…
According to news sources, the Dusseldorf Regional Court has refused a request for preliminary injunction filed by Nestlé seeking to stop competitors from selling capsules that fit its Nespresso™ coffee makers in Germany. The court reportedly ruled that Nestlé’s patent for the machine does not extend to capsules sold at a lower price by two other Swiss firms. Defendants Ethical Coffee and Betron market their products in a number of European countries as “usable for Nespresso machines.” The rival capsules are about a third less expensive than the Nestlé capsules. The company, which has aggressively defended its Nespresso™ business—worth $3.6 billion worldwide—can apparently either ask the court for a full civil-trial process or appeal the ruling. See The New York Times, Associated Press and Bloomberg, August 16, 2012.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, in a divided ruling, has determined that Wrigley’s 2000 patent for menthol chewing gum was invalid because prior patents made Wrigley’s claimed invention obvious; thus, the court determined that Cadbury did not infringe Wrigley’s patent when it reformulated its chewing gum to include the compound claimed in Wrigley’s patent. Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. v. Cadbury Adams USA LLC, Nos. 2011-1140, -1150 (Fed. Cir., decided June 22, 2012). The court also determined that Wrigley did not infringe Cadbury’s 1989 patent for menthol chewing gum because the compound used by Wrigley is not the equivalent of the compound described in Cadbury’s patent. A dissenting judge argued that the majority applied the incorrect legal standard and improperly shifted the burden of proving the validity of Wrigley’s patent to Wrigley and erred in how it assessed the evidence of commercial success and copying by others in its determination…
Oklahoma State University’s (OSU) Robert M. Kerr Food and Agriculture Products Center has reportedly signaled its intention to patent a new kind of steak after unveiling the product at the “Protein Innovation Summit” held April 16-17, 2012, in Chicago, Illinois. According to media sources, OSU researchers have dubbed the cut of beef a “Vegas Strip Steak” and said it derives from a part of the animal previously used for hamburgers. “It’s an un-obvious chunk of meat that has just been sitting there—a little diamond surrounded by a bunch of coal. The patent actually claims the kind of knife strokes that you make in order to create this cut of meat,” explained OSU Associate Vice President for Technology Development Steve Price in a May 23, 2012, NPR interview. “You take this muscle, you make cuts here, here and here and you end up with this Vegas Strip Steak.” Because it would be…
A federal court in Texas has determined that a trademark and patent infringement lawsuit involving Frito-Lay North America’s corn chip products can be maintained in the Eastern District of Texas because it has jurisdiction over the defendants and the defendants failed to show that it was “clearly more convenient” to litigate the matter in Arkansas. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. v. Medallion Foods, Inc., No. 12-74 (E.D. Tex., order entered March 30, 2012). Details about the case are included in Issue 427 of this Update. According to the court, after Frito-Lay notified the defendants that their BOWLZ product infringed its patent and trade dress rights, the defendants filed a complaint for declaratory relief in the Eastern District of Arkansas. Frito-Lay filed its suit the same day in the Eastern District of Texas. The Arkansas court stayed that action pending the Texas court’s ruling on jurisdiction and venue, noting that “[i]f the…
The U.S. Supreme Court has invited the U.S. solicitor general to submit a brief addressing the issues raised in a dispute over patent exhaustion and second-generation genetically modified (GM) seeds. Bowman v. Monsanto Co., No. 11-796 (U.S., order entered April 2, 2012). An Indiana farmer, who was found to have infringed Monsanto’s patents by planting the Roundup Ready® soybeans he purchased from a grain elevator, filed a petition for certiorari, arguing that when the company sold its patented seeds to a different farmer, who later sold the soybeans to the grain elevator, it exhausted its rights to that seed and all of its descendants. He was not required to sign a licensing agreement before buying “commodity” soybeans and thus claims that he was free to plant them and then save and replant each crop in future seasons. Monsanto reportedly contends that each generation is a separate product and that the…
A federal court in New York has dismissed, for lack of jurisdiction, the claims filed by numerous organic farming interests seeking a declaration that they are not infringing Monsanto’s genetically modified (GM) seed patents, the patents are invalid and unenforceable and the company would not be entitled to remedies against them. Organic Seed Growers & Trade Ass’n v. Monsanto Co., No. 11-2163 (S.D.N.Y., decided February 24, 2012). According to the court, because Monsanto has an express policy not to bring infringement actions against a farmer whose fields have trace amounts of its seed or traits “as a result of inadvertent means,” such as seed drift, cross-pollination or commingling with tainted equipment, the plaintiffs are unable to establish a substantial controversy or an injury traceable to the defendant. While Monsanto has brought 144 infringement actions against farmers over a 13-year period, the court found this insignificant given the 2 million farms currently…
Frito-Lay North America, Inc. has filed a trademark and patent infringement lawsuit in a Texas federal court against a company that purportedly makes a similar tortilla chip product and sells it in similar packaging. Frito-Lay N. Am., Inc. v. Medallion Foods, Inc., No. 12 00074 (E.D. Tex., filed February 10, 2012). At issue are Frito-Lay’s TOSTITOS SCOOPS! ® tortilla corn chips, which have a distinctive shape for use with salsa, guacamole and other dips. According to the complaint, Frito-Lay has registered the shape, brand design, and product and brand names as marks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and holds several patents for the processes and systems used to manufacture the chips. The defendant makes and sells a product called BOWLZ, which Frito-Lay alleges infringes its marks, trade dress and patents. With counts for federal trademark infringement, trade dress infringement and unfair competition, federal trademark dilution, patent infringement, common law…
Brandeis University has filed suit against a number of cookie and biscuit manufacturers, including Keebler Co., Famous Amos Chocolate Chip and The Pillsbury Co., alleging that they have infringed patents that adjust the LDL/HDL ratio in human serum by balancing saturated and polyunsaturated dietary fatty acids. Brandeis Univ. v. East Side Ovens, Inc., No. 11-619 (W.D. Wis., filed September 7, 2011). According to the complaint, the patents (‘497 and ‘192) were issued in 1998 and 2003 and “are directed to fats and fat blends that decrease low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) and increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) in human serum,” resulting “in significant health benefits.” The university alleges that the defendants’ cookie, cookie dough, and reduced fat biscuit and crescent roll products infringe its patents. The plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, damages, costs, and a “declaration that this is an exceptional case and an award of attorneys’ fees.
