Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ADVERTISING NEWS: Bayer CropScience Accuses Syngenta Crop Protection of Patent Infringement, False Advertising, (Apr 17, 2013)

By William Zale, J.D.

Fungicide developer and marketer Bayer CropScience has asserted that Syngenta Crop Protection, instead of developing its own products, has appropriated Bayer’s products by willfully infringing Bayer’s patents and engaging in false advertising. The complaint in Bayer CropScience, Inc. v. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC was filed in the federal district court for Middle District of North Carolina on April 16, 2013.

Bayer alleges that it enjoys exclusive U.S. rights and privileges in Reissued Patent No. RE 42,394 (the ’394 patent), entitled "Fungicidal Compositions for the Enhancement of Turf Quality," originally issued as US. Patent No. 5,599,804 in 1997 and reissued in 2011. Syngenta’s Appear™ brand fungicide is alleged to be the infringing product.

Bayer alleges that Syngenta’s use of Bayer’s SIGNATURE mark in interstate advertising or promotion constitute false advertising violation of Lanham Act Sec. 43(a)(1)(B). Among Syngenta’s allegedly false or misleading claims are the claim that "Appear™ fungicide delivers improved summer stress tolerance and greater pythium and anthracnose control than your current Chipco® Signature® program." Bayer also asserts unfair competition in violation of North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act (N. C. Gen. Stat. §§75-1.1 and 75-16).

Bayer requests injunctive relief, compensatory and treble damages, profits disgorgement, and attorney’s fees.

The case is No. 1-13-cv-00316.

Attorneys: Robert J. Koch (Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP) for Bayer CropScience, Inc. and Bayer CropScience LP.

Companies: Bayer CropScience, Inc.; Bayer CropScience LP; Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC

News: Advertising StateUnfairTradePractices