Dear all
after I found this interesting case with the patent on flowers, I went through the recent research and also spent some time on cases which so far were not relevant for our work, because only methods are claimed or plants that we are not interested in (non-food).
I selected patents granted in 2023 and 2024 or (grant intended) with a priority after 1st July 2017. I went through the examination files and tried especially to find arguments releated to Art 53 (b)
just found a few, I compiled in the table attached.
main findings:
spontaneous mutations are considered non-patentable
methods for to increase genetic diversity (random mutagenesis, demethylation) are considered as patentable (even if derived from UV-light)
if patents are based on crossing and selection, still may be granted but only in regard to methods for identification / selection/ markers
one of these cases (KWS patent EP3447134, attached) we could consider to oppose to clarify the issue what essential biological methods are. We could elaborate that all methods that - on the first step - simply increase genetic diversity, are not in line with methods as considered patentable in patent directive 98/44 (and G1/08). Deadline for opposition is 11 July. If we file opposition, this might help us for communication on level of the EU (patents on NGT plants). I attach a document from the examiners that could be used a starting point to introduce our grounds for opposition.
In any case, we should integrate these findings in our new report.
Cheers
Christoph