Planting & Sowing Patent litigation record

Technology 17 cases

17 cases on record in Planting & Sowing. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Map this field in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

17 cases on record

Cases on record
17
Classification
A01C17/00 · A01C15/02 · A01C7/00 · A01C9/00 · B65G17/04 · B65G17/32 · B65G17/36 · B67D3/00 · B67D5/06 · B67D7/06 · A01C23/00 · A01C21/00 · A01G25/16 · A01C23/04 · A01C7/12 · A01C7/04 · A01C7/20 · A01C7/16 · A01C15/00 · A01B49/06 · A01B79/00 · A01C1/06 · A01C3/06 · A01C3/04
Courts involved
N.D. Ill. · E.D. Cal. · Fed. Cir. · S.D. Iowa · D. Del. · D. Minn. · E.D. Wis. · Court of Justice of Sao Paulo
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
1:26-cv-00424 Charles Walters Equipment, LLC v. Earthway Products, Inc. N.D. Ill. 14 Jan 2026 99 d Voluntary dismissal
1:25-cv-03117 Precision Planting, LLC v. Kabat American, Inc. N.D. Ill. 24 Mar 2025 238 d Consent Judgment
1:23-cv-01340 Deerpoint Group, Inc. v. Gar Bennett, LLC E.D. Cal. 8 Sep 2023 635 d Dismissed with Prejudice
2021-1582 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1583 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1585 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1586 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1587 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1588 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
2021-1590 Precision Planting, LLC v. Deere & Company Fed. Cir. 27 Jan 2021 282 d Closed
4:20-cv-00389 Deere & Co. v. Kinze Manufacturing, Inc. S.D. Iowa 18 Dec 2020 1195 d Dismissed with Prejudice
4:20-cv-00372 Deere & Company v. Kinze Manufacturing, Inc. S.D. Iowa 4 Dec 2020 14 d Voluntary dismissal
1:18-cv-00827 Deere & Co. v. AGCO Corporation D. Del. 1 Jun 2018 1764 d Judgment on the merits for Defendant
0:15-cv-00543 GEOSYS-INTL, Inc. v. Farmers Edge Precision Consulting, Inc. D. Minn. 19 Feb 2015 783 d Likely Settlement
1:14-cv-01532 Encap, LLC v. OMS Investments, Inc. E.D. Wis. 9 Dec 2014 90 d Voluntary dismissal
1009534-04.2020.8.26.0566/50000 Sollus Mecanização Agrícola Ltda v. Piccin Máquinas Agrícolas Ltda Court of Justice of Sao Paulo – Appeal Dismissed
2331134-35.2023.8.26.0000 Marchesan Implementos and Maquinas Agrícolas Tatu S/A v. Stara S/A Industria de Implementos Agricolas Court of Justice of Sao Paulo – Appeal Granted In Part
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases classified under Planting & Sowing. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Where the claim space is crowded

Which patents are asserted most in this field, and which branches are still open.

Map this field
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.