J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
| J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Argued October 3, 2001 Decided December 10, 2001 | |
| Full case name | J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc., DBA Farm Advantage, Inc., et al. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. |
| Docket no. | 99-1996 |
| Citations | 534 U.S. 124 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 200 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2000); cert. granted, 531 U.S. 1143 (2001). |
| Subsequent | Sub nom. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int'l, Inc. v. Ottawa Plant Food, Inc., 283 F. Supp. 2d 1018 (N.D. Iowa 2003) |
| Holding | |
| Newly developed plant breeds fall within the subject matter of 35 U.S.C. § 101, and neither the Plant Patent Act nor the Plant Variety Protection Act limits the scope of § 101's coverage. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg |
| Concurrence | Scalia |
| Dissent | Breyer, joined by Stevens |
| O'Connor took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| 35 U.S.C. § 101, 7 U.S.C. § 2321, and 35 U.S.C. §§ 161–164 | |
J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., 534 U.S. 124 (2001), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court holding for the first time that utility patents may be issued for crops and other flowering (sexually reproducing) plants under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the exclusive ways to protect these plants are under the Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA), 7 U.S.C. § 2321, and the Plant Patent Act of 1930 (PPA), 35 U.S.C. §§ 161-164.