by Dennis Crouch
Driscoll’s operates as the world’s largest berry company, controlling about one-third of the $6 billion U.S. berry market. For the most part, however, Driscoll’s does not grow the berries itself, but rather develops new varieties and then licenses their use through local farmers across dozens of countries. These agreements include anti-breeding provisions layered on top of their plant patent rights.
The defendant in this case, California Berry Cultivars, LLC (CBC), was founded by Dr. Doug Shaw, a former UC Davis professor who led the university’s strawberry breeding program for decades. In 2017 Shaw was found liable for infringing several UC Davis strawberry patents. During the UC litigation, some documents apparently revealed that CBC had used Driscoll’s varieties in their breeding programs.
Driscoll then sued Shaw and CBC for infringement of their patents. PP 18,878; PP 22,247; and PP 23,400. Ultimately, however, the district court sided with the accused infringer — granting summary judgment based upon Driscoll’s failed to produce sufficient evidence that patented plants were specifically used as maternal plants (i.e., the plant bearing the seeds) in the crosses, or that any seeds derived from patented plants were imported or used within the United States.
