PublishedJuly 29, 2019

A Different Bite At The Subject Matter Apple

Utility patents aren’t the only form of patent, much less the only form of intellectual property.  While not a frequent subject of discussion in comparison to its much better known cousins, the utility patent and the design patent, the plant patent is still relevant and provides a useful example of how to protect subject matter that might not be susceptible to protection as a utility patent.

On a recent episode of the Inside Trader Joe’s podcast, the hosts discussed how intellectual property even extends to the most prosaic of produce, the apple.  Discussing varieties of apples, the discussion focused on how “holding a patent for a type of produce is becoming really important.” Their subject was the Opal apple, a Golden Delicious/Topaz cross, which is the subject of U.S. Plant Patent 15,963.  Apples are a frequent plant patent subject, and there’s even a tiny bit (or bite?) of apple plant patent litigation.  The most recent reported plant patent case I found (2006) was also about apples—a particular variety of Golden Delicious referred to as the “Scarlet Spur.”

The Trader Joe’s podcast discussion of how plant patents serve a meaningful role in developing new varieties of produce is a good reminder that not everything needs to be a utility patent.  (For that matter, not everything needs to be patented in the first place, a fact illustrated by the widespread success of open source software.)  

More relevant to current debates, the Plant Patent Act of 1930 was passed in part to address the concern that plants, as products of nature, were not patentable.  As Congress continues to consider flawed proposals to amend the utility patent statutes—primarily to address concerns over medical diagnostics and similar innovations that rely on application of a law of nature—the Plant Patent Act provides an example of an alternative approach to protecting a valuable idea.  

This alternative variety of reform has the benefit of being an approach that doesn’t threaten the significant benefits [1][2][3] that modern § 101 law has brought to patent law in other areas of technology.

Josh Landau

Patent Counsel, CCIA

Joshua Landau is the Patent Counsel at the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), where he represents and advises the association regarding patent issues.  Mr. Landau joined CCIA from WilmerHale in 2017, where he represented clients in patent litigation, counseling, and prosecution, including trials in both district courts and before the PTAB.

Prior to his time at WilmerHale, Mr. Landau was a Legal Fellow on Senator Al Franken’s Judiciary staff, focusing on privacy and technology issues.  Mr. Landau received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center and his B.S.E.E. from the University of Michigan.  Before law school, he spent several years as an automotive engineer, during which time he co-invented technology leading to U.S. Patent No. 6,934,140.

Follow @PatentJosh on Twitter.

More Posts

USPTO’s ANPRM Has Major Problems

Throughout my 26 years in Congress, including three terms as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, there was a clear need to strengthen our patent system in order to protect the rights of innovat...

Reintroduction of Advancing America’s Interests Act is a Welcome Development for Innovators

Last week, Representative David Schweikert (AZ-01) and Don Beyer (VA-08) introduced the Advancing America’s Interests Act (AAIA). If passed, this legislation would help prevent the U.S. Internationa...

USPTO Invalidates VLSI Patent—So Why Didn’t They Review It The First Time?

Earlier today, the USPTO issued its final written decision in IPR2021-01064.  The final written decision found that all challenged claims in VLSI's patent were in fact invalid. So what makes t...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.