Patent dispute over meat substitutes (Impossible Foods vs Motif)

About a year and a half ago, in connection with a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Impossible Foods against Motif, a competitor, Motif was using the IPR system in the U.S. to try to make Impossible Foods’ patents invalid. However, I found that six IPR petitions were denied, but the remaining one was approved and IPR was initiated on June 16, 2023 (IPR2023-00206).

https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-web/#/search/documents?proceedingNumber=IPR2023-00206

Here is the Impossible Foods patent that is the subject of the IPR, for which Motif’s motion was granted (US Patent No. 9943096, from now on ‘096 patent).

US9943096B2 – Methods and compositions for affecting the flavor and aroma profile of consumables – Google Patents This document relates to food products containing highl patents.google.com

Filed on January 4, 2017 and patented on April 17, 2018, “Method and composition for influencing the flavor and aroma profile of consumable products,” with 24 claims.

In the document mentioned above in which the IPR petition of 2023.6.16 was granted, one point of personal interest was that the ‘096 patent had priority claims in multiple prior patent applications and that the priority of the patent claim for which the IPR petition was filed was to be determined based on US13/941,211 (filed on 2013.7.12). The priority of the claims of the ‘096 patent was determined based on US13/941,211 (filed on July 12, 2013).

The discussion of when a priority claim is allowed is quite important, because the requirements for patent invalidity that can be asserted in an IPR are novelty or obviousness, and the basis for denying novelty or obviousness (prior art) is limited to prior patent applications or printed documents.
For the patentee, the further back in time the priority claim can be traced, the more difficult it will be for the petitioner to argue that it is novel or obvious by having to search for old prior patent applications or printed documents to deny novelty or obviousness.

In principle, the IPR is required to terminate the trial within one year after the petition is approved, and we will continue to monitor the outcome of this case.

In Europe, Impossible Foods’ patent has been revoked by opposition.

I have written about this issue in the past and if you are interested, please see my note(Japanese text only) or blog post below.

Patent dispute over meat substitutes

Patent Dispute over Meat Substitutes – and Beyond

*The English version of the note content can be found here.

Patent dispute over meat substitutes

Patent dispute over meat substitutes subsequently