October Term 2012 · Docket 11-796

Can a farmer replant patented seeds without infringing the patent?

A farmer replanted patented soybean seeds. Monsanto claims this violates the patent. The farmer argues the patent rights ended after the initial sale.

Official caption
Bowman v. Monsanto Co.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    The farmer's counsel argued that patent exhaustion allows the purchaser to practice the invention. He stated that soybeans are harvested at a specific time regardless of use. He described replanting as a desperate measure for a cheap seed source.

    Monsanto's counsel argued that the patent covers the unique genetic traits. She referenced the J. E. M. decision regarding utility patents on plants. She contended that creating new seeds violates the patent rights.

    questions_asked_by_justices

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on patent exhaustion. The farmer argues that buying the seeds exhausts the patent rights. Monsanto argues that replanting creates new patented material. The Court must decide if the first sale doctrine covers self-replicating technology.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 19, 2013.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The farmer wants the Court to rule that the initial sale exhausts the patent rights. He seeks to replant the seeds without liability.

Monsanto wants the Court to rule that replanting constitutes patent infringement. It seeks to prevent unauthorized reproduction of its patented seeds.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The farmer argues that patent exhaustion applies to self-replicating seeds. He contends that the purchaser can use the seeds for any purpose, including replanting.

Monsanto argues that the patent covers the unique genetic traits. It contends that creating new seeds from the first crop violates the patent rights.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked why inventors would invest in seed improvement if anyone could replicate them freely.

Justice Scalia asked if the patent violation occurs only when growing additional seeds from the first crop. He questioned if any farmer planting soybeans violates the patent. Justice Breyer asked if infringement lies in making the third generation of seeds. Justice Kennedy noted difficulties with characterizing the argument but suggested Monsanto could prevail if the farmer plants for seed.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of patent rights for self-replicating technology. It determines whether the first sale doctrine limits patent protection. The outcome shapes the balance between innovation incentives and agricultural practices. It affects the commercial viability of patented biological products.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON