Quick Take:
A federal court has effectively ended a Driscoll's lawsuit against a rival strawberry breeder, rejecting the Watsonville giant's claims that California Berry Cultivars infringed on its proprietary fruit varieties.
A federal court has effectively ended a years-long lawsuit filed by Driscoll’s Inc. accusing another California plant-breeding company of infringing on some of its patents. The ruling, called a motion for summary judgement, essentially means the case won’t move forward after a judge has evaluated the evidence.
The ruling was issued last week by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. It rejected claims by Driscoll’s that California Berry Cultivars had infringed on patents for four of its strawberry varieties.
Watsonville-based Driscoll’s filed the lawsuit in 2019 alleging that California Berry Cultivars improperly used the agricultural giant’s proprietary strawberry varieties in its breeding program. The court’s motion for summary judgment effectively ended the case before it could proceed to trial.
Driscoll’s did not respond to requests for comment on the ruling.
“This ruling is a strong affirmation of the integrity of our breeding program and our commitment to independent innovation in the strawberry industry,” AG Kawamura, the president of California Berry Cultivars, said in a statement. “We are proud to continue offering high-performing, flavorful strawberry varieties to growers and consumers alike.”
California Berry Cultivars, headquartered in French Camp, was founded by two former UC Davis professors with a focus on rapid development of new strawberry varieties (known as cultivars) that will produce high yields of high-quality fruit and be resistant to common diseases.