Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
ADM Edible Bean Specialties v. American Bean LLC — Seed Patent Consent Judgment | PatSnap
Explore in Eureka
Case ID0:23-cv-01096
FiledApr 2023
ClosedFeb 2025
Patent Litigation

ADM EBS v. American Bean LLC: Consent Judgment for Willful Seed Patent Infringement

ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc. obtained a sweeping consent judgment against American Bean LLC for willfully infringing three edible bean seed patents and corresponding Plant Variety Protection certificates. American Bean admitted direct and indirect infringement — including duplicating ADM EBS seed labels — with alleged recoverable damages and fees exceeding $20 million.

Resolution time
672days
672 days from filing to consent judgment — typical for complex agricultural IP consent resolutions in Minnesota federal court
Patents asserted
3
US11000005B2, US9532523B2, and US9775312B2 — patented edible bean seed varieties (Vibrant, COWBOY, Radiant) plus PVP certificates
Outcome
Consent Judgment
Plaintiff win by consent: infringement admitted, permanent injunction entered, appeal rights waived
Cost ruling
Each Party’s Own Costs
Each party bears own attorneys’ fees and costs except for future enforcement proceedings
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

Willful seed piracy ends in permanent injunction and $20M+ exposure

Filed in the District of Minnesota on 18 April 2023, this action pitted ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc. — a commercial seed developer and holder of three utility patents and multiple Plant Variety Protection certificates — against American Bean LLC, an edible bean seed distributor. ADM EBS alleged that American Bean directly and indirectly infringed its patented Vibrant, COWBOY, and Radiant bean varieties across the 2020, 2021, and 2022 growing seasons, despite receiving prior notice of the asserted IP rights.

The case closed on 18 February 2025 via a court-entered consent judgment — a negotiated instrument stipulated to be fair, reasonable, and arm’s-length. American Bean admitted willful direct and indirect infringement of the asserted patents and PVP certificates, consented to a permanent injunction, irrevocably waived all rights to challenge validity or enforceability of the asserted IP in any forum, and voluntarily relinquished appeal rights. ADM EBS placed recoverable damages and fees (excluding punitive damages) at over $20 million at the time of filing.

At 672 days, the resolution timeline suggests substantive pre-trial proceedings and negotiation before the consent framework was finalised — likely including discovery into seed chain-of-custody and labelling conduct. The label-duplication finding is commercially significant: it layered unfair competition and unjust enrichment exposure on top of the core infringement claims. The public record does not disclose the precise financial settlement terms embedded in the consent arrangement, nor the full scope of any royalty or buyout obligations running alongside the injunction.

Case at a glance
Case no.0:23-cv-01096
CourtMinnesota
JudgeN/A
FiledApril 18, 2023
ClosedFebruary 18, 2025
Duration672 days
OutcomeConsent Judgment
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisConsent Judgment
Prior Art Intelligence
See what prior art exists on this patent.
Eureka scans millions of patents and papers to surface prior art that may have invalidated these claims before costly litigation begins.
Check Prior Art
Case data sourced from PACER / Minnesota District Court via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to Consent Judgment in 672 days

672 days from filing to consent judgment — typical for complex agricultural IP consent resolutions in Minnesota federal court

Case timeline: Complaint filed APR 18 2023, MAR–APR — 672 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc. v American Bean LLC from filing to resolution. Source: PACER, Minnesota District Court. APR 18 2023 Complaint filed Pre-trial proceedings FEB 18 2025 Consent Judgment 672 DAYS TOTAL
Consent Judgment terms

Consent judgment entered: what ADM EBS’s win means for both parties

Legal mechanism

Consent judgment: admitted infringement, full injunctive relief

A consent judgment is a court-endorsed settlement in which the defendant stipulates to the plaintiff’s claims. Here, American Bean admitted willful direct and indirect infringement of three patents and multiple PVP certificates, accepted a permanent injunction, and waived all appeal and validity-challenge rights — in any court or USPTO proceeding. The judgment has issue and claim preclusion effect in future proceedings against American Bean and its related entities.

Consent Judgment — full admission
Patent holder outcome

ADM EBS secures permanent injunction and validity lock-in

ADM EBS achieved the strongest available commercial outcome short of a contested jury verdict: a binding court order confirming ownership, validity, and enforceability of all asserted patents and PVP certificates; a permanent injunction binding American Bean and its related entities; and an irrevocable waiver preventing any future USPTO or court challenge. Future contempt violations entitle ADM EBS to TRO relief, injunction, and full attorneys’ fees recovery without re-litigating liability.

Permanent injunction + validity confirmed
Defendant outcome

American Bean faces $20M+ exposure with all defences extinguished

American Bean admitted willfulness, breach of contract, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment, and faces damages claims ADM EBS valued at over $20 million (excluding punitive damages). It cannot challenge the asserted IP in any future proceeding and has surrendered appeal rights. Its related entities and successor-in-interest are bound by the same injunction, significantly complicating any restructuring or asset transfer strategy intended to escape the judgment’s reach.

$20M+ exposure, no appeal path
Commercial implications

Label duplication finding raises the IP enforcement stakes across seed distribution

The finding that American Bean duplicated ADM EBS seed tags to misrepresent origin signals that courts will treat seed counterfeiting as layering unfair competition and unjust enrichment on top of core patent claims — substantially expanding damages exposure. For the edible bean seed sector, the combination of utility patents and PVP certificate dual-protection provides a reinforced enforcement architecture. Downstream distributors handling certified seed should treat unauthorised propagation or relabelling as carrying both IP and commercial tort liability.

Seed IP + label fraud risk elevated
Legal analysis based on PACER docket records for case 0:23-cv-01096 and PatSnap Eureka litigation intelligence Search PatSnap Eureka ↗
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.CompanyCommercial edible bean seed developer and IP licensor — holder of US11000005B2, US9532523B2, US9775312B2Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantAmerican Bean LLCCompanyEdible bean seed distributor accused of unauthorised propagation, sale, and label duplication of ADM EBS protected varietiesSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselAndrea SavageauAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselElizabeth Joan Slama JohnsonAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselLauren J.F. BartaAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselMark Joseph WinebrennerAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselMartin DemoretAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselShane A. AndersonAttorneyCounsel for ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff law firmFaegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLPLaw FirmRepresenting ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselGary R LeisticoAttorneyCounsel for American Bean LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselJayne EschAttorneyCounsel for American Bean LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant law firmLeistico & Esch PLLCLaw FirmRepresenting American Bean LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge N/AJudgeMinnesota District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Official order — verbatim text

“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and personal jurisdiction over the parties. Venue is proper in this District. 2. The Consent Judgment is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Consent Judgment was negotiated in good faith and at arm’s length; this action (and the Consent Judgment) implicate federal patent and Plant Variety Protection Act laws and the Consent Judgment resolves those disputes; and the Consent Judgment advances the purposes of the patent and Plant Variety Protection Act laws and the public interest. 3. ADM EBS owns all rights, title, and interest to the Asserted Patents and the Asserted PVP Certificates. ADM EBS has standing to bring this action. 4. All the Asserted Patents and Asserted PVP Certificates are valid and enforceable. American Bean hereby irrevocably waives the right to contest, directly or indirectly, the validity and/or enforceability of the Asserted Patents or the Asserted PVP Certificates. American Bean hereby irrevocably waives the right to contend in any court, in the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or in any other forum, that the Asserted Patents or the Asserted PVP Certificates are invalid or unenforceable, regardless of the product at issue in such other proceeding. American Bean hereby irrevocably waives the right to directly or indirectly contest the validity and/or enforceability of the Asserted Patents or the Asserted PVP Certificates, or aid or assist anyone else in doing so, in CASE 0:23-cv-01096-JMB-LIB Doc. 91 Filed 02/18/25 Page 3 of 9 4 litigation or any other proceeding. These waivers also apply to American Bean’s subsidiaries, officers, directors, agents, employees, successors-in-interest, and assignees (collectively “Related Entities”). 5. American Bean has directly and indirectly infringed the Asserted Patents. American Bean has directly infringed the Asserted Patents by making, using, selling, and offering to sell ADM EBS’s edible bean seed claimed in the Asserted Patents without authorization from ADM EBS. American Bean has also indirectly infringed the Asserted Patents by actively inducing third-party growers to make, use, sell, and offer to sell ADM EBS’s edible bean seed claimed in the Asserted Patents without authorization from ADM EBS. 6. American Bean has directly and indirectly infringed the Asserted PVP Certificates. American Bean has directly infringed the Asserted PVP Certificates by illegally propagating, stocking, selling, saving, supplying, shipping, dispensing, conditioning, and delivering ADM EBS’s seed varieties protected by the Asserted PVP Certificates for reproductive/seed purposes without authorization from ADM EBS. American Bean has also indirectly infringed the Asserted PVP Certificates by actively inducing third parties to illegally propagate, stock, sell, save, supply, ship, dispense, condition, and/or deliver ADM EBS’s seed varieties protected by the Asserted PVP Certificates for reproductive/seed purposes without authorization from ADM EBS. CASE 0:23-cv-01096-JMB-LIB Doc. 91 Filed 02/18/25 Page 4 of 9 5 7. American Bean’s acts of infringement recited in Paragraphs 4 and 5 were willful and performed after American Bean received notice from ADM EBS of the Asserted Patents and Asserted PVP Certificates. 8. American Bean’s acts recited in Paragraphs 4 and 5 also resulted in the conversion of ADM EBS’s patented and/or PVPA protected seed varieties and edible bean crops grown therefrom, unfair competition, and caused American Bean to be unjustly enriched. 9. In addition, when offering to sell and selling the illegally made seed in interstate commerce, as recited in Paragraphs 4 and 5, American Bean duplicated tags and labels from ADM EBS seed and used them with the illegally made seed to create the misleading representation that the source of the seed was ADM EBS. 10. The sales contracts between ADM EBS and American Bean for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 growing seasons are valid and enforceable. American Bean hereby irrevocably waives the right to contest, directly or indirectly, the validity and/or enforceability of the sales contracts between ADM EBS and American Bean for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 growing seasons. 11. Through the acts described in Paragraphs 4 and 5, American Bean breached the sales contracts between ADM EBS and American Bean for at least the 2021, and 2022 growing seasons. 12. The acts of American Bean described in Paragraphs 4 through 10, show deliberate disregard for the rights of ADM EBS, and satisfy the standards in Minnesota CASE 0:23-cv-01096-JMB-LIB Doc. 91 Filed 02/18/25 Page 5 of 9 6 Statute 549.20 to allow punitive damages. American Bean acted with deliberate disregard for the rights of ADM ABS, as American Bean knew or intentionally disregarded that: (1) the ADM EBS seed varieties at issue were protected by patent and/or PVP Certificate, (2) American Bean was not authorized to make, use, sell, offer to sell, propagate, stock, save, supply, ship, dispense, condition, or deliver the protected ADM EBS seed varieties for reproductive/seed purposes, and (3) that if American Bean did make, use, sell, offer to sell, propagate, stock, save, supply, ship, dispense, condition, or deliver the protected ADM EBS seed varieties for reproductive/seed purposes, it would create at least a high probability (if not a certainty) of injury to the rights of ADM EBS. Notwithstanding this knowledge, and in conscious disregard of or indifference to the high degree of probability (if not certainty) of injury to the rights of ADM EBS, American Bean deliberately proceeded to make, use, sell, offer to sell, propagate, stock, save, supply, ship, dispense, condition, and deliver the protected ADM EBS seed varieties for reproductive/seed purposes, without authorization. 13. American Bean, its Related Entities, and those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, are hereby permanently enjoined from making, using, selling, and offering to sell ADM EBS’s edible bean seed claimed in the Asserted Patents without authorization from ADM EBS. American Bean shall cease immediately any activities that directly or indirectly constitute infringement of the Asserted Patents. For each respective patented variety, this injunction shall not extend beyond the respective date of the expiration of the Asserted Patent. CASE 0:23-cv-01096-JMB-LIB Doc. 91 Filed 02/18/25 Page 6 of 9 7 14. American Bean, its Related Entities, and those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, are hereby permanently enjoined from illegally propagating, stocking, selling, saving, supplying, shipping, dispensing, conditioning, and delivering ADM EBS’s seed varieties protected by the Asserted PVP Certificates for reproductive/seed purposes without authorization from ADM EBS. American Bean shall cease immediately any activities that directly or indirectly constitute infringement of the Asserted PVP Certificates. For each respective variety with PVP Certificate protection, this injunction shall not extend beyond the respective date of the expiration of the Asserted PVP Certificate. 15. Within 30 days of execution of this Judgment and by overnight delivery, American Bean shall serve upon the undersigned counsel for ADM EBS a written declaration, verified under penalty of perjury, confirming that American Bean has complied with all terms of this Judgment. 16. This Judgment shall finally conclude and dispose of this litigation. And, as to all parties (including third parties in active concert or participation of infringement), for the issues and claims contained in this Judgment, this Judgment shall be entitled to issue and claim preclusion effect in future litigation or United States Patent and Trademark Office proceedings related to the Asserted Patents and/or the Asserted PVP Certificates. The parties expressly intend such preclusion. However, such preclusion is not intended to allow non-parties to this action to use issue and claim preclusion offensively in any other matter or potential future litigation. CASE 0:23-cv-01096-JMB-LIB Doc. 91 Filed 02/18/25 Page 7 of 9 8 17. American Bean and its Related Entities voluntarily relinquish their rights to appeal this Judgment, or to challenge it in this Court or in any subsequent legal proceeding. 18. If American Bean, its Related Entities, or those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof, is found by the Court to be in contempt of, or otherwise to have violated this Judgment, ADM EBS, its successors-ininterest and assignees will suffer irreparable harm. Thus, in addition to the other remedies available to ADM EBS, its successors-in-interest and assignees for contempt or violation of this Judgment, American Bean, its related entities, or those persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice hereof consents to entry of a Temporary Restraining Order and a Preliminary Injunction. ADM EBS, its successors-in-interest and assignees also shall be entitled, in addition to any damages caused by any contempt or violation of this Judgment, to recover its attorneys’ fees, costs and other expenses incurred in enforcing this Judgment. 19. ADM EBS alleges the full amount of recoverable damages and fees in this matter, excluding punitive damages, at the time this Judgment was filed exceed $20,000,000. 20. Other than as set forth in Paragraph 17 of this Judgment, the parties shall each bear their own attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses in this action. 21. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action and the parties to this action until the Parties inform the Court that the seeds and beans subject to the Consent Injunction (Doc. No. 23) have been disposed of properly”
Source: PACER Docket, Case 0:23-cv-01096, Minnesota District Court

The consent judgment is unusually comprehensive in its admissions: American Bean did not merely consent to an injunction — it admitted willful direct and indirect infringement, breach of contract, unfair competition, unjust enrichment, and label fraud. The irrevocable validity waiver covering all courts and USPTO forums is particularly notable, as it goes beyond standard settlement releases and functions as a permanent bar to future challenges. The preclusion clause also binds American Bean’s subsidiaries, officers, and successors, making asset restructuring a limited escape route. The $20M+ figure represents ADM EBS’s floor damages claim at the time of filing, excluding punitive damages that the willfulness finding could support in enforcement proceedings.

PACER case 0:23-cv-01096 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗
Patent at issue

US11000005B2, US9532523B2 & US9775312B2 — Patented edible bean seed varieties

Publication No.US11000005B2
Application No.US15/473867
Patent details
ProductEdible bean seed line Vibrant — proprietary navy/dry bean variety with protected genetic traits
Cited in actionApril 18, 2023

Publication No.US9532523B2
Application No.US14/252926
Patent details
ProductEdible bean seed line COWBOY — proprietary pinto or dry bean variety with PVP and patent dual protection
Cited in actionApril 18, 2023

Publication No.US9775312B2
Application No.US15/016441
Patent details
ProductEdible bean seed line Radiant — proprietary edible bean variety with protected agronomic characteristics
Cited in actionApril 18, 2023

The three asserted patents — US11000005B2, US9532523B2, and US9775312B2 — protect distinct edible bean seed varieties (Vibrant, COWBOY, and Radiant respectively) developed by ADM Edible Bean Specialties. These utility patents cover the seed lines themselves, including their specific genetic and agronomic characteristics, granting ADM EBS the exclusive right to make, use, sell, and offer for sale the claimed seed varieties. The patents are complemented by Plant Variety Protection certificates under the PVPA, which separately bar unauthorised propagation, saving, and conditioning of the protected varieties for reproductive use.

For the commercial edible bean market, the combination of utility patent and PVP protection on the same variety creates a multi-layered enforcement architecture that is difficult for competitors and distributors to work around. The consent judgment confirmed all three patents and associated PVP certificates as valid and enforceable. Any seed company operating in the navy, pinto, or dry bean space that sources from unauthorised channels should treat these patents as active enforcement risks — particularly given ADM EBS’s demonstrated willingness to pursue litigation through to full judicial consent, including punitive damages eligibility.

Patent data sourced from USPTO via PatSnap Eureka patent database Search patent records in Eureka ↗
Freedom to operate

Should you run an FTO against US11000005B2, US9532523B2 & US9775312B2?

Any edible bean seed distributor, contract grower, or agricultural retailer operating in the US market that handles dry bean or navy bean varieties without a direct licence from ADM Edible Bean Specialties should treat these three patents as live FTO concerns. The consent judgment confirms that merely sourcing seed from an unauthorised intermediary — without direct contact with ADM EBS — can constitute indirect infringement. Given the PVPA overlay, even seed saving by downstream growers triggered liability in this case.

PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of US11000005B2, US9532523B2, and US9775312B2 against your current seed product portfolio, identify the PVP certificate registration status of competing varieties, and flag related continuation and divisional filings that may extend ADM EBS’s exclusivity window. Use Eureka to screen your supply chain and grower contracts against the specific agronomic traits and propagation methods captured in these claims before the next growing season.

PatSnap Eureka FTO Search

Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11000005B2 to assess your product’s exposure

Run FTO in Eureka →
Related litigation

Similar edible bean seed patent and PVP infringement cases in US federal courts

Explore related seed IP enforcement actions involving agricultural patent and Plant Variety Protection Act claims in US district courts, with comparable consent judgment and willfulness outcomes.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc. patent enforcement history, Minnesota case history, ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc.’s full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
Syngenta seed patent casesPVPA enforcement actionsAgricultural IP consent judgmentsSeed label fraud litigation
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the agricultural seed IP landscape

The ADM EBS consent judgment illustrates how dual patent-plus-PVP enforcement can decisively foreclose a competitor’s defences and lock in permanent exclusivity.

Dual patent and PVP certificate protection creates a high-barrier enforcement stack

ADM EBS’s ability to assert both utility patents and Plant Variety Protection Act certificates in the same action doubled the legal exposure for American Bean and closed off standard invalidity arguments. Seed developers operating without PVP registration alongside their utility patents are leaving a significant enforcement gap — one that American Bean could not exploit here but that remains open in other disputes.

Willfulness finding after notice means enhanced damages remain available in enforcement

The consent judgment expressly found that American Bean infringed wilfully after receiving notice of the patents and PVP certificates. Even though punitive damages were excluded from the $20M+ figure recited at consent, the willfulness predicate is preserved in the record. Any seed distributor currently operating under a cease-and-desist should treat continued activity as building an identical willfulness exposure.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Unlock full strategic analysis of agricultural seed IP enforcement in Minnesota federal court, including PVP and patent dual-stack tactics.
USPTO waiver strategyPVP vs. patent coverage gapsSeed label trade dress risk
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

ADM v American — key questions answered

Still have questions? PatSnap Eureka can answer them instantly from patent and litigation data. Ask Eureka ↗
PatSnap Eureka

Protect your seed IP portfolio before the next growing season

Run an FTO search across US11000005B2, US9532523B2, and US9775312B2 and monitor new ADM EBS enforcement actions with PatSnap Eureka. Identify exposure in your distribution or grower network before litigation risk crystallises.

Ask anything about this case.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.
Powered by PatSnap Eureka
Link copied to clipboard

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.