NEW YORK — Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed company, has won the dismissal of a lawsuit by growers of organic crops, including some from Maine, seeking to have its patents for genetically altered seeds invalidated.
U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan threw out the organic growers’ lawsuit in a ruling dated Feb. 24, saying it represented no controversy and that she had no jurisdiction over the suit. The lawsuit was brought by 36 agricultural and food safety organizations, 14 seed businesses and 33 farms and farmers across the country, according to an amended complaint filed in June. They include the Cornucopia Institute, Fedco Seeds and the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association.
Maine resident Jim Gerritsen, who grows organic seed potatoes on his family’s Wood Prairie Farm in Bridgewater, and who serves as president of the national Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association, is one of the lead plaintiffs in the suit. He could not be reached for comment on Tuesday.
They sued St. Louis-based Monsanto in March 2011 seeking court protection against possible lawsuits by the company for patent infringement if genetically modified crops were mistakenly found among their yields.
“There is no evidence that plaintiffs are infringing defendants’ patents, nor have plaintiffs suggested when, if ever, such infringement will occur,” Buchwald wrote in her opinion.
The growers, claiming that Monsanto “aggressively asserted” its patent claims against hundreds of U.S. farmers, sought a ruling from Buchwald that the patents for genetically engineered seeds are invalid because they are “injurious.”
They claimed transgenic seeds might contaminate their crops and that they don’t want to have to fight Monsanto patent claims should that occur. The company has pursued “baseless litigation to intimidate farmers and restrict competition with its transgenic seed,” according to the growers’ complaint.
“Her decision to deny farmers the right to seek legal protection from one of the world’s foremost patent bullies is gravely disappointing,” Daniel Ravicher, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an email. “Her belief that farmers are acting unreasonable when they stop growing certain crops to avoid being sued by Monsanto for patent infringement should their crops become contaminated maligns the intelligence and integrity of those farmers.”
Ravicher said the plaintiffs will appeal.
“The ruling makes it clear that there was neither a history of behavior nor a reasonable likelihood that Monsanto would pursue patent infringement matters against farmers who have no interest in using the company’s patented seed products,” David Snively, Monsanto’s general counsel, said in a statement.
Monsanto makes transgenic seeds by introducing the genetic code of one species into the DNA of another. Its transgenic seed for soybeans, called Roundup Ready, prevents the plants from being killed by an herbicide that it also sells.
The company said in January that it expects to have Roundup Ready seeds in 27 million to 30 million acres this fiscal year, an increase of more than 10 million acres from the previous year. Sales from seeds and genomics rose 13 percent to $8.58 billion in the fiscal year that ended in August, Monsanto reported in October.
The growers and seed companies contended that the transgenic seeds may damage the value of organic crops, trigger the evolution of herbicide-resistant superweeds and cost farmers their organic certification if traces of genetically modified crops are found in their yields. They also cited studies purportedly showing that transgenic seeds may harm human health.
Monsanto said its transgenics reduce costs, cut soil erosion and conserve soil moisture in dry climates. It also said it has committed not to take legal action against farmers whose crops may have “inadvertent traces” of transgenic seeds.
“This decision is a win for all farmers as it underscores that agricultural practices such as ag biotechnology, organic and conventional systems do and will continue to coexist in the agricultural marketplace,” Snively said in the statement.
Monsanto is fiddling with Pandoras Box.
Monsanto is evil. They sue farmers for patent infringement because their crops are cross pollinated with pollen from a nearby farm using Monsanto seeds. If you don’t buy seeds from Monsanto you risk getting sued for infringing on their intellectual property.
Agreed. Generally, if you buy seeds or flats from big box stores there is a high probability that you are getting Monsanto seeds. Buy local, buy organic. It is not easy to eliminate the evil Monsanto empire from your life. Here is a brief primer–
http://www.yesmagazine.org/planet/a-month-without-monsanto
Here is a starter list of seed varieties to avoid–
http://www.agardenforthehouse.com/2012/02/forewarned-is-forearmed-veggie-varieties-owned-by-monsanto/
Save your receipts then sue Monsanto if their frankencrops rape yours.
Extreme, sure, but someone has go inside and sit down at that lunch counter, sooner or later.
The first vegetable to be licensed was the hemp license, it was discussed in “Hemp For Victory”, a dept of Agriculture film from 1942. This was the beginning of the legal downfall of the vegetable kingdom. Monsanto took advantage of this precedent and we are now paying it. The drug war is a total fraud, can you see it?
hence the immorality of intellectual property rights
Justice – bought and sold by corporations. Welcome to our “democracy”.
been this way ever since the 14th amendment…nothing new here
Stop commenting until you come back to planet earth.
I’m sure the world would be a much better place if we let you run it.
not at all
the judge said that there was no case or controversy… a judge cannot simply take a hypothetical situation and make a ruling that if the situation were ever to occur, that HERE is how the case must come down.
ya wanna go get an injunction against Bigfoot from ever destroying your house? Go try… the court will dismiss the case.
Not exactly.. while this may apply to the concept that farmers require pre-emptive relief from future Monsanto actions it may not apply to the theory that the original patent was injurious and therefore should not have been granted. This is a point of fact that the plaintiffs should be given the opportunity to present. Is injury required in order to bring an action to invalidate a patent on the grounds the government made a mistake by originally granting it? Maybe these folks need to sue the patent office and not Monsanto?
The corporate person now rules.
Personally, I’m not buying into the idea of corporations being “persons” until the State of Texas executes one.
Another shining example of how lawyers for huge businesses can always beat down the little guy !
we let them…what do you expect?
27 to 30 million acres, an increase of 10 million acres. If the government will not step in directly to combat this monopoly, then we will have to refuse to purchase any corn and soy products and by-products as a nation., unless we can identify their exact source, and know whether Monsanto seed, (by any name), was used. This, or course, necessitates labeling.
I had comforted myself somewhat with the mistaken belief that the seed saving bank in Russia was a good sign. Now, I see that that, too, has ties to Monsanto via, at minimum the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, if one can believe anything that one reads on the internet, and in this case, I do.
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/campaign/save-our-seeds/seed-saving-and-seed-banks/
Thinking within the confines of this medium about having good food not ruled by any monopoly is somewhat helpful, but what needs to be done is to take direct action by contacting legislators, refusing to buy many things that are well-liked and easy, and taking a tough stand against what surely appears to me to be, at the least, unfair business and trade practices.
Then, there is the ubiquitous use of sugar beets in human foods, and people foods. I’ve known about it, but the dog’s food has it. It took many trials before finding a food that didn’t make her ill. But I was confounded/lazy? desperate, and even though I knew the history, bought the food anyway. Then, as wearisome as it is, news of this Monsanto business does work as a bit of a head-slap, and, of course, the internet will provide.. as in http://grist.org/food/2011-02-05-usda-defies-court-order-partially-deregulates-gm-sugar-beets/
Tell me that Monsanto’s hold on sugar beet seeds is within the law.
And, it’s not just a matter of the Monsanto’s — we are given prescription and over-the-counter drugs the full ingredients or which may well be completely contraindicated. Even Red 40 dye, and the like, can have very bad effects. People can argue that objecting to this is hypersensitive, but here is the bottom line: so many of the ingredients used, the pesticides used, etc., are not needed. The only reason to include them is, what?
…Monsanto is a bunch of sick greedy bullies attempting to hijack the whole food growing system of the world…they have the money to afford an army of lawyers to intimidate and push farmers around…another example of run-amuck corporate sleaze…
Definitely don’t think that DNA should be given patent rights.
DNA itself is not patentable.
not DNA that is found in nature.
the method of purifying it CAN be patented… sorry to burst your bubble.
do some real research before going on about all this… I hope you do not think that Ron Paul is a racist too, just because someone said he was?
Wasn’t the anti-gene patenting court ruling overturned?
http://investor.myriad.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=595288
Apparently isolated dna material is patentable.. not just the process for isolating it.
THERE is your 1% at work…….
Nothing Monsanto does should be allowed in any country. They should never be allowed to get patents for any animal, nor should they be allowed to put hormones in our food, milk, or be allowed to sue over any plants or crops being found in any field that Monsanto claims a patent for.
Monsanto bought Blackwater aka Xe which is the mercenary force used in Iraq and Afghanistan, private contractors. Watch out!
Monsanto thinks they are the Wal Mart of garden vegetables and anything organic, which they will turn into intellectual property for their own profit. Please find another company to buy seeds from. They will soon become a real threat to democracy in this country.
I believe this is just a nuisance lawsuit brought on by organic farming interests. They aren’t worried about being sued by Monsanto for the incidental growing of Monsanto seed on their properties. They are worried that their properties will become contaminated by Monsanto seed. Perhaps a legitimate concern, perhaps not. So I suspect the long term strategy of this lawsuit was to “encourage” Monsanto to not plant near organic fields.
See the video documentary: “The World According To Monsanto”
Do these multinational corporations make you feel like we live in a HEALTHY “republic”?
Thankfully Monsanto has a cheerleader as head of the USDA, courtesy of Barack Obama.
Sensible ruling.
Im glade that this article was out in the BDL, you should put more articles like this in the paper. This is important stuff and it doesn’t get talked about enough!! Thank you..
Praise the lord, and pass the GSO. Thats Genetically Superior Organisims. GMOs are better and more productive in every way. Gerritson and his band of luddites can march back to their own farms and wring their hands and pull out their own hair and leave the rest of us alone. Your attitudes of whats mine is mine, and whats yours is mine, doesnt play anymore. The early adopters of technology in this country are the ones who put our economy out front and provide the world with the most robust ag economy ever seen. If you want to grow vegetables and grains and sell them out of your pickup truck at the local farmers market I think thats a worthy exercise and worth your time. But dont tell me on my farm what to do, we have 6 families that live and work here and depend on new technology to make it happen every day.