Deere loses appeal in patent case against AGCO, Precision Planting

Deere & Co. faced a setback in its legal battle against AGCO Corp. and Precision Planting LLC as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a jury verdict that AGCO did not infringe on Deere’s patents related to high-speed agricultural planting technology. The patents in question, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,813,663 and 9,699,955, cover advanced systems for planting seeds efficiently.

The legal dispute originated when Deere alleged that AGCO’s SpeedTube and vSet2 products infringed on its patents. Deere claimed these systems utilized similar methods of capturing and delivering seeds during planting.

However, the jury found otherwise on Jan. 24, with the district court rejecting Deere’s post-trial motions for a judgment as a matter of law or a new trial on the infringement issue. Deere appealed the decision, but the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

The technology at the heart of the dispute focuses on seed meters and delivery systems designed to enhance the precision and speed of planting. Deere’s patents describe mechanisms for capturing seeds and delivering them to a discharge position through an endless member system, ensuring accurate placement.

AGCO countered that its SpeedTube and vSet2 products operate differently, removing seeds by projecting and accelerating them rather than capturing them, as required by Deere’s patents. During the trial, AGCO presented expert testimony and video evidence demonstrating that its products used projection, not capturing, to deliver seeds. This distinction played a critical role in the jury’s verdict and the court’s subsequent rulings.

Deere’s appeal centered on two main arguments: the district court denying its motion for a new trial and its JMOL on infringement. Deere contended that the jury’s noninfringement verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and it also challenged certain mid-trial claim construction rulings.

The Federal Circuit rejected Deere’s arguments. The court found that AGCO provided sufficient evidence to support the jury’s decision, including expert testimony showing how its products differed fundamentally from Deere’s patented systems. The appellate court also agreed with the district court’s denial of Deere’s motions, stating that there was no miscarriage of justice or legal error warranting a new trial.

“We are pleased with the court decision in favor of AGCO and Precision Planting,” AGCO wrote in a statement soon after the court’s decision. “This ruling validates our commitment to innovation and the integrity of our products. We remain dedicated to delivering high-quality solutions to our customers and will continue to focus on advancing our technology.”