Companies still have no clarity regarding whether they can claim certain CBD products
A landmark patent lawsuit against Pure Hemp Collective related to cannabidiol (CBD) has recently been dropped by United Cannabis (UCANN). This announcement ultimately leaves the legal issue of what can and can’t be patented when it comes to the cannabis compound unresolved and follows a failed attempt by UCANN after it sought to reorganize its finances through federal bankruptcy laws.
This whole legal process starts in 2018 when UCAAN decided to sue Pure Hemp because it noticed that a patent related to a cannabinoid tincture formula was allegedly infringed. In response to this lawsuit, Pure Hemp had made it very clear that UCAAN’s formula did not have the necessary basis to be patented as “substantially pure liquid CBD products are ubiquitous” in the marketplace.
Even though those ambiguities in case law might have some valid basis, US District Judge William Martinez in 2019 denied an anticipated motion by Pure Hemp to dismiss the lawsuit. Exactly one year ago, UCANN opted to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization in Colorado federal court. The bankruptcy case was dismissed earlier this year because UCANN had some ties to the marijuana industry, and that precludes it from any relief under federal bankruptcy law.
The patent case was finalized on March 31 in the U.S. District Court filing in Colorado, and it has also been noted that all counterclaims filed by Pure Hemp will be dismissed without prejudice, which gives Pure Hemp the right to file further counterclaims in the future if it so desires. After the controversy was over, none of the legal representatives of either side decided to add any additional comments.