Monsanto wins patent exhaustion case at Supreme Court

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Monsanto wins patent exhaustion case at Supreme Court

In a short and unanimous opinion in Bowman v Monsanto, the US Supreme Court has upheld the Federal Circuit’s ruling that an Indiana farmer may not reproduce patented seeds without the patent holder’s permission

The dispute concerned Monsanto’s Roundup Ready genetically modified seed and is the latest case to address patent exhaustion in the United States.

Justice Kagan delivered the opinion, which was published on May 13. She said: “In the case at hand, Bowman planted Monsanto’s patented soybeans solely to make and market replicas of them, thus depriving the company of the reward patent law provides for the sale of each article. Patent exhaustion provides no haven for that conduct.”

But she also said that the holding was “limited”: “We recognize that such inventions are becoming ever more prevalent, complex, and diverse. In another case, the article’s self-replication might occur outside the purchaser’s control. Or it might be a necessary but incidental step in using the item for another purpose.”

The Court’s decision was expected following the oral hearing, and the submission of the US government.

Oral arguments were heard in February. Farmer Hugh Bowman was represented by Mark Walters of Frommer Lawrence & Haug, while Monsanto was represented by Seth Waxman of WilmerHale.

Amicus briefs were submitted by Knowledge Ecology International, the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association, the American Antitrust Institute, Public Patent Foundation, and the Center for Food Safety and Save Our Seeds.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Gift this article