7 U.S.C. § 2581
Intent
It is the intent of Congress to provide the indicated protection for new varieties by exercise of any constitutional power needed for that end, so as to afford adequate encouragement for research, and for marketing when appropriate, to yield for the public the benefits of new varieties. Constitutional clauses 3 and 8 of article I, section 8 are both relied upon.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Asgrow Seed Co. v. Winterboer, 513 U.S. 179 (1995).
Asgrow Seed Co. v. Winterboer, 513 U.S. 179 (1995). “" 7 U. S. C. § 2581 . Because we find the sales here were unlawful, *193 we do not reach the second question on which we granted certiorariwhether sales authorized under § 2543 remain subject to the notice requirement of § 2541(6).”
Delta & Pine Land Co. & Mississippi Agric. & Forestry Experiment Station v. The Sinkers Corp., 177 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 1999). “” 7 U.S.C. § 2581 (1988). Congress laid out many ways to infringe the rights of an owner of a certificate for a novel variety in 7 U.”
Asgrow Seed Co. v. Denny Winterboer & Becky Winterboer, D/B/A Deebee's, 982 F.2d 486 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “7 U.S.C. § 2581 . Thus, the 1970 Act provides exclusive rights for a term of eighteen years to encourage the development and marketing of novel plant varieties, thereby promoting the progress of agriculture.”
Asgrow Seed Co. v. Denny Winterboer & Becky Winterboer, D/B/A Deebee's, 989 F.2d 478 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “7 U.S.C. § 2581 (1988) (emphasis added). This court in Asgrow acknowledged and respected that purpose.”
Mixon Seed Serv. Inc v. Hill (M.D. Ga. 2025). “” 7 U.S.C. § 2581 . The owner of a Plant Variety Protection Certificate has the right to control the usage of the protected variety identified by the Certificate for a period of twenty years.”
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.