|
|
 | | | |
- close
- close
- close
- close
This excerpt taken from the SYT 20-F filed Mar 1, 2006. Delaware Antritrust Case / Monsanto On July 28, 2004, Syngenta Seeds, Inc. filed an antitrust lawsuit against Monsanto Company and Monsanto Technology LLC in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware. The complaint alleges that Monsanto has engaged in a pattern of illegal and improper activities to exclude Syngenta and to monopolize key corn trait markets and seed markets in violation of the
antitrust laws, including: entering into exclusive dealing contracts, bundling incentive programs, filing baseless patent lawsuits, making misrepresentations, and coercing seed companies. Monsanto’s conduct has and will harm competition in key
corn trait and seed markets causing consumers to continue to pay higher prices than they would otherwise pay. Syngenta seeks injunctive relief and treble damages in an amount to be proven at trial. On September 28, 2004, Monsanto filed a motion to
dismiss the antitrust case on the ground that the antitrust claims should have been raised as a compulsory counterclaim to Monsanto’s patent infringement lawsuit concerning Monsanto’s plant gene patent No. 4,940,835 also pending in the
District of Delaware, or in the alternative, to consolidate the antitrust and patent cases. In an order dated March 24, 2005, the Court denied Monsanto’s motion to dismiss the antitrust case but granted its motion to consolidate. A scheduling
conference was held April 13, 2005 at which the Court denied a motion by Monsanto to stay the antitrust case pending resolution of the patent case and set a case schedule with a January 8, 2007 trial date. On July 14, 2005 Monsanto filed a motion to
amend its answer and assert counterclaims against Syngenta AG, Syngenta Participations AG, Syngenta Corp., Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Syngenta Biotechnology, Inc., Advanta USA, Inc., Garst Seed Company and Golden Harvest Seeds, Inc., for tortious
interference with contract, deceptive trade practices and Lanham Act violations based on the alleged improper passing off of GA21 as Syngenta’s product. Syngenta has filed motions opposing the addition of the Swiss-based entities on
jurisdictional grounds and to dismiss all but the tortious interference counter claim. On September 9, 2005, Syngenta filed a second amended complaint adding a claim for misrepresentations and false statements in violation of the Lanham Act. Fact
discovery started in May 2005, and is scheduled to be completed by June 2006. As fact discovery has been extended by three months, summary judgement motions will not be permitted without the Court’s prior consent. Pre-trial conference is
scheduled for December 14, 2006 and a three week trial to commence January 8, 2007.
|
| |||||||
