7 U.S.C. § 2570

Liability of States, instrumentalities of States, and State officials for infringement of plant variety protection

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 7 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in the official capacity of the officer or employee, shall not be immune, under the eleventh amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for infringement of plant variety protection under section 2541 of this title, or for any other violation under this subchapter.(b) In a suit described in subsection (a) for a violation described in that subsection, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for the violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in a suit against any private entity. Such remedies include damages, interest, costs, and treble damages under section 2564 of this title, and attorney fees under section 2565 of this title.(Pub. L. 91–577, title III, § 130, as added Pub. L. 102–560, § 3(b), Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4231; amended Pub. L. 103–349, § 13(w), Oct. 6, 1994, 108 Stat. 3144.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–349 substituted “the official capacity of the officer or employee” for “his official capacity”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–349 effective 180 days after Oct. 6, 1994, see section 15 of Pub. L. 103–349, set out as a note under section 2401 of this title.

Effective Date

Section effective with respect to violations that occur on or after Oct. 28, 1992, see section 4 of Pub. L. 102–560, set out as an Effective Date of 1992 Amendment note under section 2541 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1997–1997 · leading case: Consol. Edison Co. of New York v. O'Leary, 117 F.3d 538 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Consol. Edison Co. of New York v. O'Leary, 117 F.3d 538 (Fed. Cir. 1997). “§ 2607 (1994) (violation of anti-kickback laws); 7 U.S.C. § 2570 (1994) (violation of plant variety protection laws).”

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.