top of page

Syngenta Crop Protection LLC v. Willowood LLC, et al. (Fed. Cir. Dec. 18, 2019)

35 U.S.C. 271(g), which prohibits importation into the U.S. or offer for sale, sale or use within the U.S. of a product made by a process patented in the U.S., does not require a single actor to perform all steps of the patented process. Rather, liability arises from the importation, sale or use of the product made by the patented process.

35 U.S.C. 295 shifts the burden on the accused infringer to prove that the product was not made by the patented process once reasonable efforts is made to discover the process of making the product but to no avail.

Read the case here.

Recent Posts

See All

U.S. Supreme Court opinion of Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi

Post by Paul Serbinowski What must the specification disclose to enable broad functional claim language? A week ago in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, the U.S. Supreme Court considered what the specification mu


Commenting has been turned off.
bottom of page