First-Ever Cannabis Patent Infringement Lawsuit Was Recently Filed
Protecting intellectual property can be challenging for cannabis businesses. While patent law is one area where protection is available, the first patent infringement lawsuit involving cannabis was just recently filed.
Despite state-level legalization, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) continues to refuse federal trademark registration of medical marijuana and other cannabis-related trademarks. In addition to citing the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the USPTO also cites 37 C.F.R. § 2.69, which states that “[w]hen the sale or transportation of any product for which registration is sought is regulated under an Act of Congress, the Patent and Trademark Office may make appropriate inquiry as to compliance with such Act for the sole purpose of determining lawfulness of the commerce recited in the application.”
Cannabis companies have had far better success obtaining patent protection. According to a study conducted by Innography in 2017, there were a total of 66 U.S. patent grants and 62 U.S. patent applications related to medical marijuana. The U.S. government even holds a patent (No. 6,630,507) for the potential use of cannabinoids to protect the brain from damage or degeneration caused by certain medical conditions. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also recently approved Epidiolex, the first approved cannabis-based drug.
United Cannabis Corporation v. Pure Hemp Collective, Inc.
Late last month, the United Cannabis Corporation of Denver, Colorado (“UCANN”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Colorado against Pure Hemp Collective Inc. of Conifer (“Pure Hemp”). UCANN alleges that the rival cannabis company copied its cannabinoid medical product formula. The patent at issue is U.S.P. 9,730,911, which protects “liquid cannabinoid formulation, wherein at least 95 percent of the total cannabinoids is cannabidiol (CBD).”
According to the suit, UCANN discovered the infringement after conducting lab tests on a purchased bottle of Pure Hemp’s Vina Bell tincture. According to the suit:
The analysis revealed that the product contains a cannabinoid formulation that directly infringes one or more claims of the ’911 Patent, including exemplary claim 10: “A liquid cannabinoid formulation, wherein at least 95% of the total cannabinoids is cannabidiol (CBD).” Specifically, the Vina Bell 5000mg product contains a cannabinoid formulation wherein at least 95% of the total cannabinoids is CBD. Pure Hemp sells other cannabis products with similar cannabinoid compositions that infringe other claims of the ’911 patent.
UCANN’s suit seeks a permanent injunction against Pure Hemp, along with compensatory damages. The company is also seeking treble damages for Pure Hemp’s alleged “willful” infringement, as evidenced by its decision to continue selling the patented formulations after receiving a cease and desist letter in May of this year.
As the first “test case,” United Cannabis Corporation v. Pure Hemp Collective, Inc. has the potential to set the standard for how federal courts handle cannabis-related infringement suits. If successful, the case could also spur additional patent infringement litigation in the industry. Of course, given the fact that cannabis remains illegal under federal law, there is always the possibility that the court could dismiss the case.
If you have any questions, if you are interested in exploring these options or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Jason A. LaBerteaux, at 201-806-3364.
Disclaimer: Possession, use, distribution, and/or sale of cannabis is a Federal crime and is subject to related Federal policy. Legal advice provided by Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC is designed to counsel clients regarding the validity, scope, meaning, and application of existing and/or proposed cannabis law. Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC will not provide assistance in circumventing Federal or state cannabis law or policy, and advice provided by our office should not be construed as such.
Guardianships in New Jersey: When a Loved One Can No Longer Manage Personal or Financial Affairs
When a family member can no longer make important decisions for themself, the question is often not whether the family will step in, but whether they have the legal authority to do so. A spouse may manage household finances, or an adult child may arrange medical care and pay bills. Still, informal assistance does not […]
New Jersey’s Revised UHAC Regulations: What Residential Developers Need to Know About Affordable Housing Commitments
New Jersey residential developers with affordable housing obligations should carefully review their existing approvals, development agreements, and proposed deed restrictions in light of the State’s revised UHAC regulations (Uniform Housing Affordability Controls). The regulations, which took effect on November 6, 2025, significantly change the administration and physical requirements for affordable housing units. For developers with […]
“No Comment” Culture: Why Silence Is Often the Riskiest Legal Strategy
A “no comment” response is sometimes the right call when a legal problem arises. As a blanket policy, however, it lets allegations go unanswered, deadlines pass, evidence disappear, and manageable disputes grow into expensive litigation. The businesses that fare best are usually the ones that say little publicly while acting decisively behind the scenes. When […]
Utility-Scale Battery Storage Projects: A Legal Roadmap for Developers, Property Owners and Other Stakeholders
Utility-scale battery energy storage systems (BESS) are becoming an increasingly important component of the electric grid throughout New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. As renewable generation expands, electricity demand increases and grid operators seek greater flexibility, battery storage can help balance supply and demand while providing additional capacity and reliability. For developers, battery storage presents […]
Navigating Disputes: Hire a Partnership Dispute Lawyer
A falling out between partners can be disastrous for any business. In many cases, the partnership will not survive. If you are in an unworkable situation with your partners, it may be time to consult a partnership dispute lawyer experienced in handling partnership breakups and dissolutions before the situation deteriorates any further. It is easy […]
Section 363 Sales in Bankruptcy: What Businesses, Lenders, and Buyers Need to Know
When a company enters Chapter 11 bankruptcy, many assume the process will culminate in a lengthy reorganization plan. However, distressed businesses are increasingly being sold through a different mechanism — a sale under Section 363 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. A Section 363 sale allows a company, as a debtor-in-possession in bankruptcy, to sell […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
