Plant patents, trademarks, and PBR: Let’s discuss facts (part 1)

[Beta Test Team]

I would like to take this opportunity to invite people to post about the thread topic (I know, it's unheard of).

If you have corrections for what I wrote, or other people wrote, or more context, or additional info, etc., please post, but again, please include the source material otherwise what you post is of little value.

I have faith this thread can get back on topic, if it's not deleted first.

 

[GreenintheThumb]

Obviously spurr and eXe will never change. They are unique individuals, could we patent them? They keep coming back under different names, I hope they were properly licensed.

...sorry...couldn't help myself.

 

[Beta Test Team]

So as they say, "straight from the horses mouth" and all that. I just called USPTO and spoke with the "inventors assistance center," I asked Bob if USPTO is granting patents (plant or utility) for Cannabis. He said, "Hmmm. I don't see why not," so I asked if he can get me a definitive answer.

For the definitive answer I was transferred to the USPTO "office of patent legal administration," where I left a phone message asking for them to call me back (http://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organ...-patents/office-deputy-commissioner-patent-18).

I hope they call back today, and once I get their answer I'll post it here.

 

[MJPassion]

The reason I was able to write this thread is I spent about 2 hours researching the topic today. Chimera, you're not dealing with a dullard here, quite the extreme opposite. Just because I knew nothing when I woke up didn't mean I couldn't learn more than you seem to know in two hours of researching this topic.

Love how you want to micromanage the conversation.
If peeps don't agree with you, you attack them.
If peeps give you a clue to further your own research, you attack them for not providing a link.

I've got a suggestion for ya... when you feel your head begin to heat up because somebody slapped you in your egos face, step away from the keyboard and collect your thoughts.

The 5th Amendment gives you the "Right To Remain Silent". Some people just can't shut themselves up. I can be one of them, fyi.

In regards to the quote above...
How do you claim to be an authority of these laws when you are clearly struggling to understand the difference between a "variety" and a "cultivar" cultivated variety

 

[Beta Test Team]

Your definition of cultivar (from a dictionary, no less) isn't applicable to this thread, I thought I explained that you already here (https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=6792920&postcount=6). And trust me, I knew where the word cultivar was derived from long ago.

The basic tenant of science and research is you (not you personally, this is just an example) prove your own claim. Don't make an unsubstituted claim and then tell the person you're making that claim to, to go research your claim. You're the one that made the claim, so you're the one that has to prove said claim. This is really very basic logic. That's why studies have reference section. I'm not sure why this is so unclear to you and Chimera (especially considering he has a degree, I think?).

See what I did in my first post? I made a lot of claims, which I then backed up with my source material, so you, or anyone, can read the source material and point out errors (if I made any). This is what everyone should be doing.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Great, so I got the definitive answer from Alice at USPTO, and I quote: "patentabilty doesn't relate to legality."

In other words, the USPTO will grant plant and utility patents for drug Cannabis plants.

Alice even said she has seen Cannabis plant patent that were granted in the past, yet, when I asked her to identify them or tell me how I can find them she couldn't be any help. Saying she's "been here for 27 years" and that the patent she saw were before the Internet, saying she wouldn't know how to find it again. However, I suspect she's misremembering or thinking of hemp, not drug Cannabis.

I searched patents from 1980 to 2010 and I couldn't find a single one granted for a drug Cannabis plant. However, if one looks at 2010 to present, there are at least 3 with patent applications pending, none of which are yet granted.

I'll go update my previous posts with this info.

Interestingly, the much ballyhooed "Otto II" from Colorado that some guy is trying to get a utility patent for (I think it's utility, not plant patent), doesn't show up in my patent database searches.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140245494.pdf
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140245495.pdf
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US20140259228.pdf

 

[Cool Moe]

Why do you think the U.S. government would grant patents or trademarks for cannabis plants when current federal Schedule 1 status prohibits even the top U.S. scientists from conducting any research at all? One reason could be to collect your $50K BEFORE they send the DEA out to arrest you, but that's just my opinion, which of course is of no value to you.

 

[Beta Test Team]

The U.S. government isn't a monolith. One hand can do one thing, while the other is doing the complete opposite.

There are many patents and patent applications for various Cannabis products and methods, including breeding, creating extracts, etc.

 

[hyb.0]

Interesting turn of events, no?

 

[Scottish Research]

I love the work being done by scientists such as Chimera, but the bottom line is that Cannabis is still Illegal throughout most of the world.

No Patents will be granted until accepted countrywide or worldwide.

I have had dealings with the U.S. patent office, through the help of paid patent attorneys... It's not easy.

RF

 

[Beta Test Team]

I love the work being done by scientists such as Chimera, but the bottom line is that Cannabis is still Illegal throughout most of the world.

No Patents will be granted until accepted countrywide or worldwide.

I have had dealings with the U.S. patent office, through the help of paid patent attorneys... It's not easy.

RF

There does seem to be some question as to whether the USPTO will grant a patent for a Cannabis plant. For example:

- The official USPTO stance I got today from the USPTO "office of patent legal administration" is that they will grant patents for drug Cannabis plants.

- An IP/patent attorney who works with the Cannabis industry on these issues said on Wednesday (https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=299138) that the USPTO won't grant patents for Cannabis plants. She also said federal trademark protection for the cultivar's name isn't possible either, at this time.

- Chimera wrote about an article he read where an attorney said the USPTO seem to be treating Cannabis plant patents like any other patent (no source provided).

- Sam wrote patents will not be grated (no source provided).


I think maybe what the USPTO will do on paper, and what happens in real life may not be exactly the same. It will be interesting to see if those three different chemotype cultivars linked to above (from Israel) get granted patents.

Soon we'll find out the ruling for the federal case that may end up being prompting re-scheduling for Cannabis, it's due to end on Feb. 11th: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=295664

 

[Betterhaff]

Well the USPTO granted a patent for cannabinoids, which are schedule 1 substances, to the US govt (US Pat #6630507). But the patent only claims “method of use”.

 

[Sam_Skunkman]

z

There does seem to be some question as to whether the USPTO will grant a patent for a Cannabis plant. For example:

- The official USPTO stance I got today from the USPTO "office of patent legal administration" is that they will grant patents for drug Cannabis plants.

- An IP/patent attorney who works with the Cannabis industry on these issues said on Wednesday (https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=299138) that the USPTO won't grant patents for Cannabis plants. She also said federal trademark protection for the cultivar's name isn't possible either, at this time.

- Chimera wrote about an article he read where an attorney said the USPTO seem to be treating Cannabis plant patents like any other patent (no source provided).

- Sam wrote patents will not be grated (no source provided).
I think I said none have been granted yet in the USA. From what I understand UPOV is not available for registration in the USA because Cannabis is illegal, the same with a plant patent, because that requires the applicant to supply the plant to be registered or patented and for it to be examined, grown, by the government, and you can't do that in the USA. I do believe a utility patent can be done for Cannabis in the USA.
The reason I can't prove that no Cannabis is registered or patented in the USA is because how do I prove a negative? If any Cannabis is registered in the USA or plant patented please list them.....
My real expertise is with plant registrations PBR, not patents.
People are getting closer to the reality, keep it up you will find the truth.
-SamS

I think maybe what the USPTO will do on paper, and what happens in real life may not be exactly the same. It will be interesting to see if those three different chemotype cultivars linked to above (from Israel) get granted patents.

Soon we'll find out the ruling for the federal case that may end up being prompting re-scheduling for Cannabis, it's due to end on Feb. 11th: https://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=295664

 

[Scottish Research]

z

Tell me how it fucking works in GA you ****!

Matt

 

[Scottish Research]

I't don't work.

RF

 

[Scottish Research]

One is not fed shit! We lose pounds!

I lost fucking 18 LBS in less than 30 days!

I was then offered genetics by fuckng Liars!

RF

 

[Space Toker]

I thought I commented on a plant patent thread, either it's been deleted or can't find it, but against patenting living things. All for protecting someone's work. there must be a balance somewhere.

 

[Beta Test Team]

Sam, thanks for your comments.

 

[plastochron]

In a thread on a topic as potentially polarizing as cannabis genetics IP you’d think that there would be a more interesting argument than whose cock knows more about international plant IP regulations. I haven’t a dog in this fight, but I’d like to put this egotistical goading to sleep.



All that being said, I would be surprised I would be surprised if one could learn more about this topic in 2 hours of research than the knowledge Chimera has accumulated over years of breeding, staying at the forefront of commercial implementation of plant science biotech, and presumably trying to protect his IP to whatever degree possible. I mean if dude is kicking it with a couple of the only people that have ever been granted PBRs for drug type cannabis, you have to imagine that he has more practical insight into this matter than one can find on the UPOV and USPTO websites. Almost as good as getting a direct response from DP Watson or RCC! I really appreciate getting direct input from these cats; we can all dig as much as we want but there is a ton of information that can only be gained through braving the process of applying to protect IP.

However, in a article I recently read a patent attorney claims the patent office seems to be treating them in the same fashion as they treat any other application.

All that being said, Chimera cold you kindly link us this article?

Great, so I got the definitive answer from Alice at USPTO, and I quote: "patentabilty doesn't relate to legality."

In other words, the USPTO will grant plant and utility patents for drug Cannabis plants.

Alice even said she has seen Cannabis plant patent that were granted in the past, yet, when I asked her to identify them or tell me how I can find them she couldn't be any help. Saying she's "been here for 27 years" and that the patent she saw were before the Internet, saying she wouldn't know how to find it again. However, I suspect she's misremembering or thinking of hemp, not drug Cannabis.

Beta, could you elaborate on what Alice said? Although, as evidenced by the fed’s patent of cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants, it is possible to patent processes that are not currently federally legal without intrinsically breaking federal law.
It is funny that you mention Alice potentially confusing hemp and drug type cannabis; ironically the only drug type cultivars that have been granted PBRs are lumped in with hemp.

 

[harry74]

It looks to me that many here deal with plants/ mother nature, the same way they deal with women.

You don´t treat Mary Jane that different from the way some well known american men treated Marilyn Monroe.


Think About That.