トップページ
Monsanto
Monsantoの歴史
(
http://bestmeal.info/monsanto/company-history.shtml )
Delta
and Pine Land Company 買収断念
BASF and Monsanto Announce R&D
and Commercialization Collaboration Agreement in Plant
Biotechnology
Monsanto Questioned by Justice
Department on DuPont’s Complaint
U.S. Opens Inquiry Into Monsanto
December 11, 2006
WSJ
Monsanto bid for Delta
could run into trouble
Monsanto Co.'s attempt to buy southern
seed giant Delta & Pine Land Co. could be running into trouble as
an unusual backlash against the proposed combination is taking
root across the U.S. Farm Belt, the Wall Street Journal reported
on its Web site on Monday.
Some biotech-industry leaders are prodding the attorneys general
of several states to look into the combination as an antitrust
review by the Justice Department extends into its fourth month,
the paper said.
2006/8/15
Monsanto
Monsanto Company To
Acquire Delta And Pine Land Company For $1.5 Billion In Cash
Monsanto Company and
Delta and Pine Land Company announced today that they have
signed a definitive agreement whereby Monsanto will
acquire Delta and Pine Land Company for $1.5 billion in cash.
The
transaction was unanimously approved by the Boards of
Directors of both companies and is subject to Delta and Pine
Land shareowner approval, antitrust clearance, and customary
closing conditions.
Delta
and Pine Land Company is a leader in the cotton seed industry
and
currently operates the largest and longest running private
cotton seed breeding program in the world. The company's
extensive plant breeding programs, including its diverse base
of international germplasm, has enabled the company to
develop and deliver improved cotton varieties for their
farmer customers for more than 90 years.
2007/5/31 Monsanto
Monsanto Company Reaches
Agreement With U.S. Department of Justice on Elements of Consent
Decree, Set to Complete Its Acquisition of Delta and Pine Land
Company
Monsanto Company
announced today that it has reached an agreement with the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ) that will allow it to complete its
proposed acquisition of Delta and Pine Land
Company.
Under terms of the agreement, which was filed today in Federal
Court in Washington, D.C., Monsanto will be required to
divest certain assets including its U.S. branded cotton seed
business.
Monsanto plans to close its acquisition and resulting
divestitures as soon as possible following the required approvals
from the court and the DOJ.
モンサントは米国第1位の棉種子会社のDelta and Pine Land の買収で合意したが、司法省による独禁法の審査が大幅に遅れ、1999年12月に買収を断念した。
Delta社は棉種子市場の最大手であるとともに、ターミネーター技術(種子を死滅させる毒性タンパクを作る遺伝子を組み込み、2回目の発芽の際には種子が死滅する技術)を保有している。
一世代限りの種子(ターミネーター)
モンサント社が開発凍結
国際的反対世論の高まりで
アメリカのバイオ企業モンサント社は1999/10/4、遺伝子操作で農作物を自家採種できなくするターミネーター・テクノロジーの開発を当面凍結し、商品化を見送る方針を明らかにしました。
この技術は、種子を死滅させる毒性タンパクを作る遺伝子を植物の細胞の中に組み込み、一回目の発芽の時は、その毒素遺伝子にカギがかけられて種実は収穫できるが、二回目にはそのカギが外れて種子が死滅するという仕組み。これはアメリカの農務省と種子企業デルタ&パイランド社が開発、モンサント社がデルタ社を買収して、この技術を手中に収めました。
しかし、2005年に同社は、ターミネータ種子を非食料作物(例えば綿?)には使用すると示唆しつつ、”食料作物には不妊種子技術を商業化せず、将来、ターミネータの他の用途を除外することはしない”と公約の記述を修正した。
Acquisition expected to
facilitate greater innovation in the cotton industry
In line
with its agreement with the DOJ, Monsanto announced that:
-- It has entered into a definitive agreement to sell its Stoneville® cotton seed brand
and related business assets, subject to Justice Department
approval, to Bayer CropScience for $310 million. As part of this
agreement, Monsanto has agreed to sell to Bayer CropScience
certain conventional cotton parental lines that Monsanto will
acquire from Delta and Pine Land's cotton breeding program.
Monsanto will retain a non-exclusive license to these same
parental lines. Bayer's FiberMax® brand and the Stoneville brand
will continue to be licensed to use Monsanto's cotton trait
technologies.
-- It has entered into a definitive agreement to sell its NexGen™
cotton seed brand
and related business assets, also subject to Justice Department
approval, to Americot for $6.8 million. As part of this
agreement, Monsanto has agreed to sell to Americot certain
conventional cotton parental lines that Delta and Pine Land
acquired from Syngenta in 2006. The Americot®
and NexGen brands
will continue to be licensed to use Monsanto's cotton trait
technologies.
-- It will be amending certain cotton licensing agreements so
that its other cotton licensees have the same terms that Delta
and Pine Land enjoyed with regard to the use of third-party trait
technologies.
-- It will provide to Syngenta certain germplasm in Delta and
Pine Land's breeding pipeline that contains VIPCot™
trait technology.
This action is intended to allow Syngenta to continue its
development of this technology.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/kagaku/pico/kaigai/kaigai_06/06_08/060816_etc_Monsanto.html
モンサント社 とD&PL
社は、アメリカの綿の種子市場で合わせて57%以上のシェアを持つ。中国、インド、ブラジル、メキシコ、トルコ、及びパキスタンのような主要な市場を含む13カ国にある
D&PL 社の関連会社も含むこの買収は、モンサント社が世界の最も重要な貿易農産物のひとつを支配下に置くとともに、数百万の農民が遺伝子組み換え(GM)の綿の種子を受け入れざるを得ない圧力を受ける状況となることを意味する。
デルタ&パイン・ランド社(D&PL)はアメリカ農務省とともにターミネータ技術−遺伝子組み換えにより収穫時の種子を不妊にする技術−の初期の開発を行ったことで悪名高い。農民、民間社会、及び多数の政府による大規模な反対にもかかわらず、デルタ&パイン・ランド社(D&PL)はその技術を商業化すると繰り返し主張し、彼らの主要な市場は、アフリカ、アジア、及びラテン・アメリカであると宣言した。同社はすでに温室でターミネータ遺伝子を含む遺伝子組み換えの綿とタバコを栽培していると主張している。
モンサント社による1998年のデルタ&パイン・ランド社の18億ドル(約2,000億円)での買収計画は、ターミネータ技術に関し世界的に議論が行われていた1999年に破談となった。大きな反対に対応して、モンサント社の前
CEO、ロバート・シャピロは1999年に、同社は不妊種子技術の商業化は行わないと公に約束した。
モンサント社の報道官ロリ・フィッシャーは種子を不妊とする技術を使用するつもりはなく、”食料作物に対しては不妊種子技術を商業化しない”という2005年の公約に立っていると伝えてきた。この公約はまた、”モンサントの人々は技術の発展に伴いこの立場を常に再評価する”と述べている。
Genetic
Use Restriction Technology
In 1999, some
stakeholders expressed fears that a sterile-seed technology
then under development by the U.S. government and a cotton
seed company might lead to dependence for poor smallholder
farmers. In response, Monsanto made a commitment not to
commercialize sterile-seed technologies in food crops. It
continues to stand by that commitment today, but Monsanto
people constantly reevaluate this stance as technology
develops.
Monsanto does
not rule out the potential development and use of one of
these technologies in the future. The company will continue
to study the risks and benefits of this technology on a
case-by-case basis.
Open
Letter From Monsanto CEO Robert B. Shapiro To Rockefeller
Foundation President Gordon Conway and others
DATE:
October 4, 1999
I
am writing to let you know that we are making a public
commitment not to commercialize sterile seed technologies, such
as the one dubbed "Terminator." We are doing this based on input
from you and a wide range of other experts and stakeholders,
including our very important grower constituency.
As you know, sterile seed technology is one of a class of so
called "gene protection systems." This is a group of
technologies, all still in the conceptual or developmental stage,
that could potentially be used to protect the investment
companies make in developing genetically-improved crops, as well
as possibly providing other agronomic benefits. Some would work
by rendering seeds from such crops sterile, while others would
work by other means, such as deactivating only the value-added
biotech trait. One of the sterile seed technologies was developed
and patented jointly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and
Delta & Pine Land, with which we announced our intent to
merge in the spring of 1998.
Last April, after hearing concerns about the potential impact of
gene protection systems in developing countries and consulting
with a number of international experts and development leaders,
we called for a thorough, independent review of gene protection
systems. We also pledged not to commercialize any of them until
that review was completed and we had responded to the issues
raised.
Since then, however, we have continued to listen to people who
have a particular interest in sterile seed technologies,
including the concerns you expressed to our Board in June. Though
we do not yet own any sterile seed technology, we think it is
important to respond to those concerns at this time by making
clear our commitment not to commercialize gene
protection systems that render seed sterile.
It is also important to understand that the technical and
business utility of sterile seed technology is speculative. The
specific technology over which Monsanto would gain ownership
through its pending merger with Delta & Pine Land is developmental, at
least five years away from any possible commercialization, and may or may not prove workable
in a commercial setting. The need for companies to protect and
gain a return on their investments in agricultural innovation is
real. Without this return, we would no longer be able to continue
developing new products growers have said they want.
Monsanto holds patents on technological approaches to gene
protection that do not render seeds sterile and has studied one
that would inactivate only the specific gene(s) responsible for
the value-added biotech trait. We are not currently investing
resources to develop these technologies, but we do not rule out
their future development and use for gene protection or their
possible agronomic benefits.
For this reason, we continue to support the open, independent
airing of all of the issues raised by the use of gene protection
systems to protect the investment companies make in agricultural
innovation. We understand, for example, that the National
Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences is planning
an international study of these issues. We renew the pledge we
made in April that we will not make any decision to
commercialize a gene protection technology until a full airing of
the issues is complete and we have responded publicly to the
concerns that are raised.
We are fully committed to modern biotechnology as a safe,
sustainable tool for farmers and an important contributor to the
future success of agriculture in meeting the world's needs for
food and fiber. The technology has already brought important
benefits to growers and the environment after just a few years of
commercial application. We are working hard to build on this
success.
We also recognize that biotechnology, like any new technology,
raises issues that must be addressed. We appreciate your
involvement with these important issues and the perspective and
expertise you contributed at our June Board meeting. We find
significant value in engaging stakeholders and the expert
community in active dialogue on issues surrounding biotechnology
and the future success of agriculture. I look forward to
continuing our dialogue with you on the many issues and
challenges that lie ahead.
Sincerely, Robert B. Shapiro Chairman and CEO Monsanto Company
2009/10/9 Bloomberg
Monsanto
Questioned by Justice Department on Rival’s Complaint
Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed producer, said it
received questions from the U.S. Justice Department about
anti-competition complaints that rival DuPont Co.
made in a lawsuit.
The Justice Department’s inquiry is another sign the
Obama administration is taking an aggressive approach to
antitrust enforcement. Philip Weiser, the antitrust division’s deputy assistant attorney
general, said at an August meeting on agriculture markets that
the government had “concerns about the competitive
consequences of how the marketplace is evolving.”
The questions
Monsanto received about three months ago weren’t a formal request, known as a civil
investigative demand,
Lee Quarles, a spokesman for St. Louis-based Monsanto, said
yesterday. Other agriculture companies may also be receiving
questions after the Justice Department in August said it would
examine competition in several farming markets, he said.
Civil
Investigative Demands 民事調査請求 (15 USCS §57b-1)
FTC の委員は、不当行為の疑いのある者が当該不当行為の調査に関する文書資料或いは情報を所有、保管支配していると判断できる場合には、法令に基づいて、民事訴訟手続に着手する前の段階において、以下のような資料を提出するよう書面にして、当該者に対してCID を発行する権限を有する。
※
不当行為の調査に係る資料となる文書の作成とその複写
※ 物的資料
※
作成された資料等に関する文書による質問への回答
※ 当該文書資料等に関する口頭による証言
CID の書面には、調査の対象が法令違反を構成する疑いのある行為であることを明記しなければならない。
“We are cooperating and openly
providing documents,” Quarles said. “We believe these claims are
baseless.” Justice Department spokeswoman
Gina Talamona had no immediate comment yesterday.
Monsanto rose 64 cents to $74.97 yesterday on the New York Stock
Exchange, pushing this year’s gain to 5.7 percent.
DuPont’s anticompetitive claim stems from
a Monsanto complaint filed in May accusing DuPont of violating a
2002 license by using Monsanto’s Roundup Ready trait with DuPont’s GAT genetics in soybeans. GAT
genetics were designed to be an alternative to Roundup Ready
crops, which tolerate applications of glyphosate herbicide, known
as Roundup.
デュポン社が中心となり、グリホサート農薬耐性大豆とコーンの種子を開発。
この大豆及びコーンはOPTIMUM・GAT と商標登録され、シンジェンタ及び同社とパイオニア(デュポン子会社)のジョイントベンチャーであるGREENLEAF GENETICS 社に使用許可。
20年以上前に開発した除草剤ラウンドアップ。
1996年にモンサントは、ラウンドアップで枯れない遺伝子組み換え作物を売り出した。 ラウンドアップ・レディと名付けられた作物は、農家が除草剤を圃場に散布しても、作物を殺さずに雑草を殺すことが出来る。
モンサントと法廷で争っている会社もある。 デュポン社は、モンサントをラウンドアップとラウンドアップレディ作物をセットしにしていることと、競争相手を排除するために、報奨金や資格を使っていることは、独占禁止法に触れるとして2つの訴訟を連邦裁判所に起こしている。
Monsanto Challenges
Unauthorized Use of Roundup Ready®
Technology by
DuPont
DuPont Relying On
Monsanto's Proven Technology In Attempt To Repair Optimum®
GAT®
Problems
ST. LOUIS, May 5,
2009 -- Monsanto Company announced that it filed suit
yesterday in federal court in St. Louis against E.I. du Pont
de Nemours and Company and its wholly owned subsidiary,
Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., to prevent unlawful use
of Monsanto's proprietary Roundup Ready®
herbicide
tolerant technologies in soybeans and corn.
"As the saying
goes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery," said
Hugh Grant, Monsanto Chief Executive Officer. "However,
unlawfully taking technology is neither imitation nor
flattery; it is unethical and wrong. A true technology
company respects patents and its contractual agreements and
delivers new products through its own innovation and honest
collaboration. DuPont has failed on all counts."
Pioneer, like
hundreds of other seed companies, has the right to sell
soybeans and corn with the Roundup Ready trait. For several
years, Pioneer publicly touted plans to replace Monsanto's
Roundup Ready trait with DuPont's claimed glyphosate tolerant
Optimum® GAT®
trait. However,
Pioneer has recently admitted that the Optimum
GAT trait when used alone presents unacceptable risks to
farmers.
In an effort to
repair these deficiencies, Pioneer is misusing the
Roundup Ready trait to mask problems with their Optimum GAT
trait. This
violates Monsanto's contract rights and U.S. patents. This
suit insists that DuPont honor their agreements and respect
patented technologies.
This is not the first
time that Monsanto has had to file litigation against Pioneer
for breaches of their contractual obligations with Monsanto.
In a previous case involving Monsanto's YieldGard®
Corn Borer
trait, it was determined by the Court that Pioneer had
breached its license and improperly used Monsanto's patented
technology. After that case, in which Monsanto prevailed, an
agreement was reached in which Pioneer was able to continue
licensed use of Monsanto's technology. As in this previous
case, Monsanto is confident once again that it will prevail.
True inventions will
be critical to meeting future global food demand. Experts now
predict our planet will need to double agricultural output by
2050 to feed a growing population. Protecting inventions and
respecting contracts are critical to driving broad investment to meet this challenge.
Monsanto's investment in innovation is clear and consistent.
It is presently delivering to farmers two game-changing
technologies that will help achieve higher yields, in Genuity™
Roundup Ready 2
Yield™ in soybeans and SmartStax™
in corn.
DuPont
Claims
DuPont’s Pioneer unit, the second-largest
seed producer, said it has the right to use Monsanto’s trait. Wilmington,
Delaware-based DuPont also claimed the Monsanto patent is invalid
and the company is misusing its patent rights to control the
markets for “virtually every commercially
important agricultural biotech trait in corn and soybeans.”
“Any time a
competitor in an industry would raise an allegation that there is
some sort of anticompetitive action going on, the department
would look into that,” Quarles said.
The state of Iowa launched a formal antitrust probe into Monsanto’s business practices in 2007. The
company has heard nothing since the state attorney general’s office told the company all its
questions were answered, Quarles said.
The dispute highlights competition in the $8.3 billion market for
biotech seeds that ward off insects or withstand the application
of weed killers. More than 90 percent of soybeans and 80 percent
of corn in the U.S. are genetically modified.
Antitrust Regulators
In addition to the inquiry into Monsanto, the Justice Department’s antitrust division, headed by
Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney, is looking into
International Business Machine Corp.’s dominance of the mainframe
computer market. The Justice Department is also concerned that
the pending merger of Ticketmaster Entertainment Inc. and Live
Nation Inc. may reduce competition for tickets to live events, a
person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg News.
St. Louis Business Journal
Quarles
said the nature of the Justice Department's questions are
similar to ones Monsanto received from the department leading
up to its $1.5 billion acquisition of Mississippi-based Delta
& Pine Land in 2007, a deal DuPont actively tried to
block.
In August, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and U.S.
Attorney General Eric Holder announced an investigation of
competitive practices in agriculture, including the seed
industry.
In addition to Monsanto, the Justice Department also has
contacted two of Monsanto’s competitors: Delaware-based
DuPont and Swiss biotech firm Syngenta.
DuPont spokesman Dan Turner said the company has been
contacted by the Justice Department and that the company is
cooperating with the investigation.
In May, Monsanto sued DuPont to prevent what it called “unlawful use”
of Monsanto’s herbicide-tolerant
technologies in soybeans and corn.
DuPont countersued in June, arguing that combining its
technologies with Monsanto’s was within its rights under
the license agreement with Monsanto.
Then the years-long rivalry ratcheted up in August when
Monsanto called for a probe into what it described as DuPont’s “deceitful”
attacks on
Monsanto’s business practices. Monsanto
Chairman and Chief Executive Hugh Grant demanded that DuPont
Chairman Charles Holliday Jr. appoint a committee to
investigate the alleged attacks.
Monsanto accused DuPont of writing forged letters to
Congress, spreading misinformation, trying to improperly
influence public officials and hiring “masked third parties, such as
Weber Merritt.”
WSJ
JANUARY 15, 2010
U.S. Opens Inquiry Into Monsanto
Antitrust Enforcers Probe Business Practices Surrounding Biotech
Soybean Seed
The U.S. Justice Department has opened a formal antitrust
investigation into crop-biotechnology giant Monsanto Co. as it
contends with the loss of patent protection on its blockbuster
soybean in 2014.
Monsanto on Thursday received a formal demand from the Justice
Department for information about the St. Louis company's business
practices surrounding its Roundup Ready soybean, the nation's most popular
genetically-modified crop.
Roundup Ready
米国モンサント社が開発した、除草剤(商品名:ラウンドアップ)耐性農作物の総称。
開発された農作物にはダイズ、トウモロコシ、ナタネ、ワタ、テンサイなどがある。これらは除草剤ラウンドアップを処理しても枯れず、雑草だけが除かれるため、除草が簡便で生産者メリットが多いとされている。
Roughly
90% of all the soybeans grown in the U.S. contain a Monsanto gene
that helps the plant survive dousing by Monsanto's Roundup
weedkiller. Introduced in 1996, the Roundup Ready soybean seed
allows farmers to chemically remove weeds from their fields
without damaging crops.
With that seed losing patent protection in four years, Monsanto
is trying to get farmers to switch to a second
generation of Roundup Ready seed that still will be protected.
Justice Department spokeswoman Gina Talamona confirmed Thursday
that antitrust regulators have begun a formal investigation of
the seed industry. She refused to identify the investigation's
target or provide specific details.
In the wake of Monsanto's disclosure, the company's shares fell
$1.16, or 1.4%, to $82.79 in 4 p.m. composite trading on the New
York Stock Exchange.
Controversy over Monsanto's plans for Roundup Ready soybeans grew
so heated across the Farm Belt last year that the company
declared that it wouldn't stand in the way of farmers using
off-patent seeds.
"We're confident that a thorough review will show that all
of our business practices are fair, pro-competitive and in
compliance with the law," Monsanto spokesman Lee Quarles
said.
Monsanto has been in regulators' sights since the Justice
Department said in August it would take a hard look at economic
concentration in agriculture as part on an increased emphasis on
antitrust enforcement.
Farmers and seed companies that license genes from Monsanto have
long complained about the prices it can command. The price of a
bag of soybean seed has roughly quadrupled since the biotech-era
dawned in 1996.
---
Jan.
14, 2010 Monsanto
Monsanto Announces
Continued Cooperation With the U.S. Department of Justice
Monsanto Company
announced that the U.S. Department of Justice has issued a civil
investigative demand (CID) requesting information on its soybean
traits business, primarily seeking a confirmation
that, as Monsanto has previously indicated, farmers and seed
companies will continue to have access to the first-generation
Roundup Ready® trait following
patent expiry in 2014.
Antitrust questions
have been swirling around Monsanto for months. Yesterday,
Monsanto said that the Justice Department issued a formal
"civil investigative demand" for information about
Monsanto's Roundup Ready soybeans. Monsanto said that the
demand centered on whether the seeds would remain available
after the patent on them expires in 2014. The company is
trying to get farmers to switch to a second-generation
version of the technology, but says the old version will
remain available.
"Monsanto continues
to cooperate with the U.S. Department of Justice inquiries, just
as we have over the last several months," said Scott
Partridge, Monsanto's Chief Deputy General Counsel. "We
respect the thorough regulatory process. We believe our business
practices are fair, pro-competitive and in compliance with the
law."
Monsanto has voluntarily
cooperated with regulators to address their questions about its
business and the broader agriculture industry. This request
represents a continuation of that process. During this time, the
company has provided extensive access to millions of pages of
documents to ensure that regulators' questions are addressed.
Monsanto noted that it will continue to provide information that
is requested of its business.
"Given the pace and
scale of agriculture biotechnology adoption as well as the
expiration of the Roundup Ready soybean patents in 2014, we
understand why regulators would want to know more about
competition in modern agriculture and how products are
commercialized and used," said Partridge. "We believe
that an objective review will show our business and our industry
to be competitive."
In December 2009,
Monsanto took the initiative to clear up growing confusion in the
soybean industry by confirming that Roundup Ready
soybeans would remain available after patent expiry. The company remains committed to
working with the soybean industry, public and private parties
alike on this matter, so that the markets served by soybean
farmers are not disrupted. Information about this transition is
available online here.
December
16, 2009
Monsanto
Plans for Roundup Ready®
Soybeans
Post Patent
The world’s most widely adopted biotech
trait, Roundup ReadyR soybeans, is set to go off patent soon
in the U.S. ? the last applicable Monsanto-owned patent is
expected to expire in 2014. Although it’s still several years off, we’ve been discussing our
thoughts about a post-patent environment for the past several
years. These discussions culminated in communications with
our seed licensees at the American Seed Trade Association
annual meeting, held the first week of December.
As the company that first introduced biotech soybeans to the
market, we’re also the first company to
deal with figuring out what to do next. This is a big
responsibility, and we’ve given it serious
consideration. The first generation Roundup Ready soybean
trait (sometimes referred to as “RR1”) was launched in 1996.
Farmers rapidly began using the technology on their farms
because of the improved weed control benefits. We sold
soybeans with the Roundup Ready trait in our own seed brands,
but also made the decision to license the technology broadly
to other seed companies so that they could use the technology
in their own varieties of soybean seed that they sell under
their own brands. This approach made Roundup Ready technology
more widely available, and at the same time gave farmers the
option to buy seed from the company of their choice.
Now, almost 14 years later, the Roundup Ready trait is so
successful that farmers have chosen to plant soybeans that
use the technology on 9 out of 10 acres in the U.S.
Beginning in 2015, the RR1 trait will be available for use
without royalty because all patents in the U.S. will have
expired. We sent a letter yesterday to industry stakeholders
to notify them of our plans and explain this in more detail.
The U.S. Department of
Justice and U.S. Department of Agriculture are conducting an
ongoing review of the entire agriculture industry, including the
seed and trait industry. Monsanto recently submitted comments to
the Departments as part of the public comment period which ended
on Dec. 31, 2009. The company's comments as well as its response
to third party submissions are available on Monsanto's homepage
under the "A look at the seed industry" section.
----------------
NYT
The Monsanto Company, the
world’s largest seed producer, said on
Thursday that the Justice Department had formally requested
information on its herbicide-tolerant soybean seed business as
part of an investigation into anticompetitive practices.
The company said in a
statementthat the Justice Department was seeking confirmation
that competitors and farmers would have access to the seed,
first-generation Roundup Ready, after the patent expired in 2014.
The Justice Department’s antitrust division “is investigating the possibility
of anticompetitive practices in the seed industry,”
a department
spokeswoman, Gina Talamona, said.
Monsanto will not block
seed makers from creating generic versions of any of its
gene-modified seeds as they lose patent protection, the chief
executive, Hugh Grant, said. Starting in 2015, farmers can replant Roundup
Ready soybeans saved from the last year’s harvest, and rival seed makers
can create their own Roundup-tolerant seeds.
“We
understand why regulators would want to know more about
competition in modern agriculture and how products are
commercialized and used,” Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s chief deputy general counsel,
said in the statement. “We believe that an objective
review will show our business and our industry to be competitive.”
The company said it had
provided access to “millions of pages of documents”
and it was
cooperating with the inquiry.
Roundup Ready soybeans
are engineered to withstand Monsanto’s Roundup, the world’s most popular weed-killer.
Contracts protect Monsanto’s patents in part by prohibiting
farmers from planting saved seeds.
The Justice Department
made informal inquiries last year into claims from the
DuPont Company,
the second-biggest seed company, that Monsanto unfairly used
genetic licenses to dominate the engineered seed market.
Including seeds made by
licensees, about 93 percent of soybean plantings last year
contained Monsanto’s Roundup Ready trait.
------------
January
15, 2010 St. Louis Business Journal
Supreme Court to take up Monsanto alfalfa case
The Supreme Court said Friday it would consider overturning a
court order that has blocked Monsanto Co. from selling alfalfa
seeds that are genetically modified to resist its Roundup weed
killer.
The nation’s highest court said it would hear
Monsanto’s appeal of a ruling that
prevented its Roundup Ready alfalfa from being planted since
2007.
The court’s decision in this case also could
affect a second ruling involving the biotech company’s modified sugar beets.
Opponents claim that Monsanto’s genetically engineered seeds
contaminate other crops, and that Roundup Ready promote
superweeds, weeds that cannot easily be killed because they have
developed a tolerance to weedkiller.
Monsanto defends its products, saying that cross-pollination is
unlikely and that the environment benefits because less
weedkiller would be used.
The Center for Food Safety filed a 2006 lawsuit on behalf of a
coalition of non-profits and farmers who wanted to retain the
choice to plant non-modified alfalfa, according to the center.
CFS won the case and two appeals by Monsanto in the Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 2008 and 2009. Now the Supreme
Court has agreed to hear the case.
2009/9/21
Roundup Ready Alfalfa
Court Case
Roundup Ready alfalfa
completed review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
was approved by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and
went on the market in 2005. However, a federal lawsuit was
filed in early 2006 by the Center for Food Safety in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California,
citing the failure to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) by USDA.
In May 2007, Judge
Charles R. Breyer enjoined the further sale or planting of
Roundup Ready alfalfa pending completion of the EIS by USDA's
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).
2007年5月、サンフランシスコ連邦地裁が米国全土での遺伝子組み換え(GM)アルファルファを栽培することを禁止した。以前の一時的禁止の決定を恒久化するもので、判事は、近隣農家を護るために、それが栽培されている場所を30日以内に公表することも命じた。
この決定の対象となるのはモンサント社が開発した除草剤耐性のラウンドアップ・レディーGMアルファルファで、今年はこの禁止前、主に飼料用に、全国でおよそ9万f栽培されたという。
判決は、米国農務省(USDA)がGM作物が有機作物・非GM作物を汚染する可能性に関する適切な研究をしなかったと指摘、商業栽培許可前には、他花受粉の可能性などを含む完全な環境影響研究を行うことを命じた。モンサントは上訴するということだが、USDAはこれに従うという。
これはアルファルファにかかわるだけだが、これが前例となり、影響は他のGM作物の承認にも及ぶ可能性がある。米国では、このアルファルファと同類の除草剤耐性GM大豆・トウモロコシ・ワタも大量に栽培されている。
2008年9月、米国第9巡回区控訴裁判所が除草剤耐性遺伝子組み換え(GM)ラウンドアップ・レディーアルファルファの栽培の、完全な環境影響評価書が出るまでの禁止を確認した。
これは、米国農務省(USDA)がラウンドアップ・レディーアルファルファによる通常のアルファルファや有機アルファルファの汚染の問題に十分に取り組んでいないとした07年5月の連邦地裁の判決を改めて確認するものである。
第9巡回区控訴裁判所は、GMアルファルファの栽培が、有機及び通常品種に対する取り返すことができないかもしれない損害、環境に対する損害、そして農業者に対する経済的損害をもたらす可能性があると裁定したということである。
Mar 19, 2016
Monsanto shows interest in Bayer's crop
science unit
Monsanto Co, the world's largest seed producer, has approached Bayer AG to
express interest in its crop science unit, including a potential acquisition
worth more than $30 billion, according to people familiar with the matter.
The move underscores Monsanto's unabated expansion drive after Switzerland's
Syngenta AG rejected its takeover approaches last year and agreed earlier this
year to be acquired by ChemChina for $43 billion.
It also illustrates Monsanto's determination to further consolidate its
industry, as the global seed and crop protection market continues to suffer from
high inventories and low prices for agricultural commodities.
Monsanto executives met in Chicago recently to discuss the company's interest in
Bayer's agricultural assets, the sources said this week. Monsanto sees valuable
synergies between its seed business and the crop protection assets of Bayer, the
sources added.
Among the possibilities discussed were an outright acquisition of the crop
science unit and a joint venture or other type of partnership between the two
companies, the sources said. These talks were preliminary, and another meeting
between the two sides has been scheduled for April, the sources added.
Bayer has been holding the talks with Monsanto to probe its interest, the
sources said. The German company currently has no plans to actively pursue a
sale of its crop science division, the sources added.
The sources asked not to be identified because the discussions were
confidential. Monsanto and Bayer declined to comment.
Bayer's crop science division has businesses in seeds, crop protection and
non-agricultural pest control. It had sales of 10.4 billion euros ($11.7
billion) in 2015 and posted adjusted earnings before interest, tax, depreciation
and amortization of 2.42 billion euros.
Bayer is the second biggest player in crop chemicals, with an 18 per cent market
share, just behind Syngenta, which has a 19 per cent share. Monsanto is a leader
in seeds, with a 26 per cent market share, followed by Dupont, with 21 per cent.
DuPont agreed last year to merge with Dow Chemical.
Bayer said last year it planned to keep its crop chemicals business, saying it
was an "integral part" of the German healthcare group. It has said it aims to
concentrate on its core brands in crop protection.
It also wants to strengthen its position in its established crops — cotton,
oilseed rape/canola, rice and vegetables — and to establish competitive
positions in soybeans and wheat.
August 11, 2018 Reuters カリフォルニアの陪審員、モンサントの除草剤Roundup
による癌で289百万ドルの賠償評決 (EPAは発癌性なし、WHOは発癌性の可能性あり)
Monsanto ordered to pay $289 million in world's first Roundup cancer trial
A California jury on Friday found Monsanto liable in a lawsuit filed by a man
who alleged the company’s glyphosate-based weed-killers, including
Roundup, caused his cancer
and ordered the company to pay $289 million in damages.
The case of school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson was the first lawsuit to go to
trial alleging glyphosate causes cancer. Monsanto, a unit of Bayer AG following
a $62.5 billion acquisition by the German conglomerate, faces more than 5,000
similar lawsuits across the United States.
The jury at San Francisco’s Superior Court of California deliberated for three
days before finding that Monsanto had failed to warn
Johnson and other consumers of the cancer risks posed by its weed killers.
It awarded $39 million in compensatory and
$250 million in punitive damages.
Monsanto in a statement said it would appeal the verdict. “Today’s decision does
not change the fact that more than 800 scientific studies and reviews...support
the fact that glyphosate does not cause cancer, and did not cause Mr. Johnson’s
cancer,” the company said.
Monsanto denies that glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, causes
cancer and says decades of scientific studies have shown the chemical to be safe
for human use.
Johnson’s case, filed in 2016, was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of
his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma リンパ腫, a cancer of the lymph system that he alleges
was caused by Roundup and Ranger Pro, another Monsanto glyphosate herbicide.
Johnson’s doctors said he is unlikely to live past 2020.
A former pest control manager for a California county school system, Johnson,
46, applied the weed killer up to 30 times per year.
Brent Wisner, a lawyer for Johnson, in a statement said jurors for the first
time had seen internal company documents “proving that Monsanto has known for
decades that glyphosate and specifically Roundup could cause cancer.” He called
on Monsanto to “put consumer safety first over profits.”
Over the course of the four-week trial, jurors heard testimony by statisticians,
doctors, public health researchers and epidemiologists who disagreed on whether
glyphosate can cause cancer.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in
September 2017 concluded a decades-long assessment of glyphosate risks and found
the chemical not likely carcinogenic to humans. But
the World Health Organization’s cancer arm in 2015
classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to
humans.”
--------------------
Bayer said in a statement: “Bayer is
confident, based on the strength of the science, the conclusions of regulators
around the world and decades of experience, that glyphosate is safe for use and
does not cause cancer when used according to the label.”
2021/10/6
The former Monsanto Co., now owned by
Bayer AG, notched its first win in the mass tort U.S. Roundup litigation
on Tuesday, defeating at trial a mother who alleged her use of Roundup
exposed her child to the pesticide and caused him to develop cancer.
Ezra Clark was born in May 2011 and
diagnosed in 2016 with Burkitt’s lymphoma, a form of non-Hodgkin
lymphoma (NHL) that has a high tendency to spread to the central nervous
system, and can also involve the liver, spleen and bone marrow,
according to the court filings. Ezra’s mother, Destiny Clark, is the
plaintiff in the case, which was heard in Los Angeles County Superior
Court. A different Roundup trial is underway in San Bernardino County
Superior Court.
Ezra Clark was “directly exposed” to
Roundup many times as he accompanied his mother while she sprayed
Roundup to kill weeds around the property where the family lived,
according to court documents. Ezra has autism and his mother said it
calmed him to play outdoors while she worked in the yard, which meant he
often played in areas freshly sprayed with Roundup, according to the
court filings.
Fletch Trammell, lead attorney for
Clark, said his case was subject to a bifurcation order that organized
the case into two phases. In the first phase he was limited to
presenting evidence that focused on the child’s personal exposure to
Roundup and whether or not it could have been enough to have contributed
to his disease. The case would have proceeded to a second phase had the
plaintiff won the first phase, but the loss in the first phases ends the
trial.
“This was nothing like any of the
other three trials,” Trammell said.
The jury was asked to address one key
question in the first phase: Whether or not the child’s exposure to
Roundup was a “substantial factor” in his development of Burkitt’s
lymphoma.
In a 9 to 3 decision, the jury found
that it was not.
Trammell said the jury decision was
because the jury doubted the child’s exposure to Roundup could have been
enough to cause cancer. The decision did not address the larger question
of the alleged carcinogenicity of Roundup overall, he said.
But Bayer, which bought Monsanto in
2018 as the first Roundup trial was getting underway, said the jury’s
decision was in line with scientific research showing glyphosate, the
main ingredient in Roundup, is safe and does not cause cancer.
“The jury
carefully considered the science applicable to this case and determined
that Roundup was not the cause of his illness,” the company said in a
statement.
80 hours
During the
trial, Trammel presented evidence indicating Ezra was exposed to Roundup
for about 80 cumulative hours over the years his mother sprayed with him
at her side. He paired that with research showing there could ben an
increased risk of NHL associated with repeated spraying of glyphosate
herbicides, such as Roundup. And he noted language on Roundup labels in
Canada that advise users to wear protective gloves and avoid getting the
chemical on bare skin.
“The
studies… they show that Roundup does three different things when it gets
to your lymphocyte cells… It can kill cells, which is bad enough; but
it also causes the exact DNA damage that results in Burkitt’s lymphoma;
it also, in a variety of ways, devastates your body’s ability to repair
DNA damage,” Trammell told jurors in his closing argument.
Trammell also sought to counter
problems with deposition testimony given by Destiny Clark. Trammell said
the mother also has suffered from cancer, a cervical cancer that
metastasized to her brain. The illness and treatments she has undergone
made it difficult for her to recall details and she “made a lot of
mistakes” in the deposition she gave to Monsanto’s attorneys, Trammell
told jurors. But she was very clear, he told jurors, on recalling her
use of Roundup nearly “every weekend” when Ezra was young.
Monsanto attorney Brian Stekloff
told jurors that Ezra’s exposure was in doubt. He told jurors that while
they might have sympathy for the family, they could not ignore
inconsistencies in Destiny Clark’s testimony about how often her son was
exposed, and could not ignore statements by other family members that
they did not see her spraying around Ezra.
“And there is an old adage or old
saying, and it goes like this: The truth is simple because there’s
nothing to remember,” Stekloff told jurors. “When you tell the truth,
you don’t mix up the facts. It’s when it didn’t happen that you can’t
remember what you said the first time and the next time, and the next
time, and the next time. And the inconsistencies start piling up and
piling up, and the explanations start coming and piling up and piling
up. And that’s what you have seen here in this trial.”
Stekloff told jurors the evidence did
not support a finding that exposure to Roundup was a substantial factor
in causing his cancer.
“This is not a popularity contest.
This is not a referendum on Monsanto. It’s not even a referendum on
Roundup,” he said in his closing argument. “Roundup did not cause Ezra
Clark’s Burkitt’s lymphoma.”
Clark is one of tens of thousands of
plaintiffs who filed U.S. lawsuits against Monsanto after the World
Health Organization’s cancer experts in 2015 classified
glyphosate – the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicides – as a
probable human carcinogen with an association to NHL.
Monsanto lost each of the three
previous trials, after lawyers for the plaintiffs presented jurors with
multiple scientific studies finding potential health risks with
glyphosate and Roundup The plaintiffs lawyers also used internal
Monsanto documents as evidence, arguing the so-called “Monsanto Papers”
showed intentional efforts by the company to manipulate regulators and
control scientific research.
The jury in the last trial ordered $2
billion in damages though the award was later shaved to $87 million.
http://www.knak.jp/blog/2019-7-2.htm#monsanto
Bayer has maintained that there is no
cancer risk with the glyphosate herbicides it inherited from Monsanto,
but it has agreed to pay close to $14 billion to try to settle the
litigation and said it will remove glyphosate products from the U.S.
consumer market by 2023. The company will continue to sell the
herbicides to farmers and other commercial users.
Mike Miller, who heads the Virginia
law firm that won two of the three previously held Roundup trials, i but
who was not involved in the Clark case, said the verdict does not change
anything about the litigation, nor Bayer’s liability.
“Nothing about that verdict change
the fact: Roundup causes cancer,” he said.
April 6, 2024 Reuters
Judge slashes Bayer $1.56 billion
Roundup verdict to $611 million
A Missouri judge slashed a $1.56 billion verdict against Bayer, opens
new tab to $611 million for three people who claimed its Roundup weed
killer caused their cancer, by reducing punitive damages.
Bayer said on Friday it is appealing.
The German company's Monsanto unit had been found liable in November by
a Cole County, Missouri, jury to Valorie Gunther of New York, Jimmy
Draeger of Missouri and Daniel Anderson of California, who blamed their
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma on their exposure to Roundup.
Jurors found Monsanto liable for negligence, design defects and failing
to warn about Roundup's risks. They awarded $61.1
million of compensatory damages and $1.5 billion of punitive damages,
with the latter divided equally among the plaintiffs.
In orders on March 15, Judge Daniel Green let the $61.1 million
component stand, but reduced punitive damages to
nine times that amount, or $549.9 million.
The U.S. Supreme Court has said that punitive damages should generally
not be more than nine times compensatory damages.
Bayer had sought to throw out the verdict, as well as reduce damages,
and filed a notice of appeal on March 22.
It has said decades of studies have shown that Roundup and its active
ingredient glyphosate are safe.
"While the court reduced the unconstitutionally excessive damage award,
the company believes that the court did not apply the law correctly on
damages," Bayer said on Friday. "We also disagree with the ruling on the
liability verdict as it is at odds with the extensive weight of
scientific evidence."
Florida-based U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee,
rejected Trump's argument that the case accusing him of illegally
holding on to classified documents should be thrown out.
Bart Rankin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement the
reduced awards are "unassailably constitutional," and "align with the
evidence of Monsanto's willful, malicious, and reckless disregard for
the safety of consumers and the injuries suffered by these plaintiffs."
Roundup is among the most widely used weedkillers in the United States,
though Bayer phased out sales for home use last year.
Bayer has faced extensive litigation over whether Roundup causes cancer
since it bought Monsanto for $63 billion in 2018.
It agreed to settle much of that litigation for $10.9 billion in 2020,
but failed to resolve future cases. About 113,000, opens new tab of the
167,000 claims that Bayer has faced have been settled or deemed
ineligible.
Though Bayer has won the majority of its more recent Roundup trials,
plaintiffs have won more than $4 billion of verdicts, including $2.25
billion in a single case in January. Bayer is appealing those verdicts.