04/06/2013
Confirmed decision that denied patent extension of Monsanto's GE soya Autor: TJ/RS
The Third Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) in the trial of offenses regimental endorsed decisions that had denied appeals by Monsanto Technology LLC to extend the term of the patent for genetically modified soybeans in Brazil. Following established case law by the Second Section, the Panel confirmed that the patent expired on August 31, 2010, ie 20 years after the date of your first deposit abroad.
Two special features, Monsanto questioned understanding of the Federal Regional Court of the 2nd Region to recognize patent expiry. Contended that the validity of a foreign patent - the call pipeline - must exactly match the remaining term of protection in the foreign country where it was granted for it to fall concurrently in the public domain.
Also alleged that in the specific case the remaining term of protection for the patent pipeline should be counted from the date of filing of foreign patent in Brazil and not the deposit held abroad. Also contended that the trial of the case by the Supreme Court should be suspended because pending in the Supreme Court (STF) a direct action of unconstitutionality (ADI 4234) Articles 230 and 231 of Law 9.279/96 (Industrial Property Law), which address the patent filing.
Unanimity
One of the features of Monsanto was initially rejected by a decision of the judge summoned monocratic Vasco Della Giustina, the other by decision of the Minister Villas Boas Cueva, who took over the collection process the judge after he leaves the STJ. At the sitting of the Third Chamber, Cueva was the rapporteur of the diseases brought by the company against the two decisions.
Following the vote of the rapporteur, supported by precedents already established in the Court, Class dropped all arguments of Monsanto. On the request for dismissal of the deed, Villas Boas Cueva pointed out that the pending trial in the Supreme Court action that discusses the constitutionality of the law does not suspend the resources that move in STJ.
On the merits, the Panel reiterated that the Second Section, which includes the two classes of private law standardized the understanding that "the protection offered to foreign patents, patent pipeline calls, lasts for the remaining term of protection in the country where it was deposited first request, to the maximum term of protection granted in Brazil - 20 years - from the date of the first filing abroad, even if subsequently abandoned. "
Thus, "the allegations put on interlocutory appeal are unable to alter the contested decision," concluded the Rapporteur, in his vote.
