<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>Mit Percy Schmeiser zieht nun derjenige
vor den Supreme Court von Kanada, der wg. Kontamination seiner Raps-Zucht durch
Monsanto-Pollen (Patentrechtsverwicklungen) zu hoher Geldstrafe verurteilt
wurde. Der Federal Court begründete, "egal wie Monsantos Gen-Konstrukt auf sein
Feld gelangte, sei er im Sinne der Anklage schuldig" - </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>näheres unter <A
href="http://www.percyschmeiser.com">www.percyschmeiser.com</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>gruss aus dem pott,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2>martin</FONT></DIV></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>FARMER WINS
RIGHT TO APPEAL CANOLA RULING<BR>May 8, 2003<BR>CBC News<BR></FONT><A
href="http://cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/08/percy_monsanto030508"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://cbc.ca/stories/2003/05/08/percy_monsanto030508</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>The Supreme Court Thursday granted Saskatchewan
farmer Percy Schmeiser the<BR>right to appeal a Federal Court of Appeal judgment
that he had violated<BR>Monsanto Canada Inc.'s patent on canola
technology.<BR>Schmeiser<BR>The ruling does not reverse the Federal Court's
ruling, but allows Schmeiser<BR>and his lawyers to take their appeal to the
Supreme Court. No date has been<BR>set for the appeal, but it's likely it will
be in the fall.<BR>Schmeiser has a farm and farm-implement dealership near
Bruno, Sask. The<BR>Federal Court ruled last September that Schmeiser violated
Monsanto's patent<BR>on its genetically modified canola seeds.<BR>Backgrounder:
Percy Schmeiser<BR>Schmeiser has claimed the Monsanto seeds blew onto his
property. The Federal<BR>Court didn't disagree that the Monsanto's seeds may
have blown onto<BR>Schmeiser's property, but said it was Schmeiser's obligation
to destroy the<BR>seeds.<BR>"We were hopeful the unanimous decision of the
Federal Court of Appeal would<BR>have put an end to unnecessary and costly legal
action in this case," Trish<BR>Jordan, Monsanto Canada spokesperson, said
Thursday.<BR>"However, we look forward to the opportunity to complete this final
stage of<BR>the legal process and are confident the decision of the federal
Court of<BR>Appeal will be upheld once the Supreme Court has had the opportunity
to<BR>review the evidence in this case."<BR>Schmeiser, 72, has told CBC News
Online that he has spent more than $200,000<BR>in his battle with Monsanto. He
grows canola, wheat, peas and oats on his<BR>1,400-acre farm east of
Saskatoon.<BR>2002 column: What next for Percy Schmeiser?<BR>2001 column: Percy
versus Monsanto<BR>Justice Andrew MacKay of the Federal Court of Canada referred
to tests that<BR>showed there was too much Monsanto canola on Schmeiser's farm
to be<BR>considered accidental.<BR>MacKay ruled the seed could only be of
commercial quality and could not have<BR>blown onto in Schmeiser's
field.<BR>Schmeiser insists he never deliberately planted Monsanto seeds. He
said<BR>seeds can fly for miles, as far as from North Dakota to
northern<BR>Saskatchewan.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>MONSANTO CANADA INC.: SUPREME COURT
OF CANADA GRANTS<BR>SCHMEISER'S APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
PATENT<BR>INFRINGEMENT JUDGMENT<BR>May 8, 2003<BR>>From a press
release<BR>WINNIPEG, MANITOBA--The Supreme Court of Canada has granted
Percy<BR>Schmeiser's application for Leave to Appeal a Federal Court of
Appeal<BR>judgment that found he had violated Monsanto Canada Inc.'s patent on
Roundup<BR>Ready canola technology (</FONT><A
href="http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/information/index_e.asp"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://www.scc-csc.gc.ca/information/index_e.asp</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>)<BR>According to the Supreme Court of Canada,
this decision does not mean the<BR>judgment of the Court of Appeal is reversed.
It simply means that Mr.<BR>Schmeiser and his legal counsel have been given
permission to argue their<BR>appeal before the Supreme Court. The
Registrar has not yet set a date for<BR>the appeal hearing, but appeals are
typically heard once the parties and any<BR>interveners have prepared and filed
the required documents with the Court.<BR>The next session of the Supreme Court
does not begin until the first Tuesday<BR>in October and is scheduled to last
three months. Both Mr. Schmeiser's<BR>legal counsel and Monsanto Canada's
legal counsel will have a limited amount<BR>of time to present their respective
cases before the Supreme Court once a<BR>hearing date has been set.<BR>"We were
hopeful the unanimous decision of the Federal Court of Appeal would<BR>have put
an end to unnecessary and costly legal action in this case," said<BR>Trish
Jordan, Monsanto Canada spokesperson. "However, we look forward to
the<BR>opportunity to complete this final stage of the legal process and
are<BR>confident the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal will be upheld
once<BR>the Supreme Court has had the opportunity to review the evidence in
this<BR>case."<BR>During the original trial, Justice Andrew MacKay of the
Federal Court of<BR>Canada pointed to independent tests that showed 1,030 acres
of Mr.<BR>Schmeiser's canola were 95 percent to 98 percent tolerant to
Roundup<BR>herbicide. At such a high level of tolerance, Justice MacKay ruled
the seed<BR>could only be of commercial quality and could not have arrived in
Mr.<BR>Schmeiser's field by accident. The case of Percy Schmeiser and
Schmeiser<BR>Enterprises Ltd. vs. Monsanto Canada Inc. and Monsanto Company is
the only<BR>patent infringement case in Canada involving Monsanto's patented
canola<BR>technology to be heard by the Federal Court of Canada. It has always
been<BR>Monsanto Canada's preference to settle any deliberate violations of
its<BR>patented technology outside of the Federal Court system. The
decision<BR>documents of Justice Andrew MacKay and the three-member Federal
Court of<BR>Appeal can be found at the following links:<BR>Federal Court of
Appeal Ruling September 4, 2002,<BR></FONT><A
href="http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fct/2002/2002fca309.html"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fct/2002/2002fca309.html</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Federal Court of Canada Ruling of March 29,
2001,<BR></FONT><A
href="http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fct/2001/2001fct256.html"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fct/2001/2001fct256.html</FONT></A><BR></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>