We’ve reported pretty extensively on the progress of United Cannabis Corporation’s (UCANN) patent infringement lawsuit against Pure Hemp Collective, Inc. since it was filed back in July 2018. (See posts here, here, here, here, here, here… and here!) In the initial months, this was a fascinating case to watch because it was the first of its kind, and the industry was anxious to see how it would unfold.
The subject patent is U.S.P. 9,730,911 – “cannabis extracts and methods of preparing and using same,” which generally covers liquid cannabinol formulations using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and various terpenes (the “911 Patent”). The 911 Patent generally covers liquid cannabinoid formulations using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD), and various terpenes. UCANN had alleged that Pure Hemp’s “Vina Bell” product contains a cannabinoid formulation that directly infringes on claims 10, 12, 14, 20-22, 25, 27, 28, 31, and 33 of the 911 Patent. Pure Hemp had argued UCANN’s formula wasn’t patentable because “substantially pure liquid CBD products are ubiquitous.”
Then, UCANN had no choice but to file for relief under Chapter 11. As we discussed in this post, the patent infringement lawsuit was automatically stayed and the Court decided to close the case subject to