7 U.S.C. § 2561
Remedy for infringement of plant variety protection
An owner shall have remedy by civil action for infringement of plant variety protection under section 2541 of this title. If a variety is sold under the name of a variety shown in a certificate, there is a prima facie presumption that it is the same variety.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Edward Showmaker v. Advanta Usa, Inc. (Formally Known as Garst Seed Co. & Doing Bus. as Garst Seed Co.), 411 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Edward Showmaker v. Advanta Usa, Inc. (Formally Known as Garst Seed Co. & Doing Bus. as Garst Seed Co.), 411 F.3d 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “See also 7 U.S.C. § 2561 (1995); 7 C.P.R. § 97.140-97.”
Pub. Varieties of Mississippi, Inc. v. Sun Valley Seed Co., 734 F. Supp. 250 (N.D. Miss. 1990). “” 7 U.S.C. § 2561 (emphasis supplied). By its plain meaning, the statute only permits a party with an ownership interest in a protected variety — through the common law rights to the variety and the certificate of plant variety protection which entitles a breeder to governmental…”
Mixon Seed Serv. Inc v. Hill (M.D. Ga. 2025). “” 7 U.S.C. § 2561 . 7 U.S.C. § 2541 (a)(1) provides that Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, it shall be an infringement of the rights of the owner of a protected variety to perform without authority, any of the following acts in the United States, or in commerce…”
Showmaker v. Advanta USA (Fed. Cir. 2005). “§ 2541 1 See also 7 U.S.C. § 2561 (1995); 7 C.F.R. § 97.140-97.”
Turfgrass Grp., Inc. v. Ne. Louisiana Turf Farms, LLC, 58 F. Supp. 3d 688 (W.D. La. 2014). “, 7 U.S.C.A. § 2561 states, “if a variety is sold under the name of a variety shown in a certificate, there is a prima facie presumption that it is the same variety.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.