UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION AG,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UPL LTD,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`Patent 11,445,727
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF CAIO PRATES OF
`SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION AG
`
`SYNGENTA EXHIBIT 1020
`Syngenta v. UPL, PGR2023-00017
`
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION AG,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UPL LTD,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`Patent 11,445,727
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF CAIO PRATES OF
`SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION AG
`
`SYNGENTA EXHIBIT 1020
`Syngenta v. UPL, PGR2023-00017
`
`
`
`
`I, Caio Prates, hereby declare as follows:
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`1.
`
`My name is Caio Prates and I am an employee of Syngenta Crop
`
`Protection AG, where I have worked for almost 12 years. My current position is
`
`Fungicides Technical Manager at Syngenta Crop Protection AG, São Paulo, Brazil.
`
`2.
`
`I make this declaration based upon personal knowledge. I am over the age
`
`of 21 and otherwise competent to make this declaration.
`
`3.
`
`My responsibilities at Syngenta Corp Protection AG (“Syngenta”) are
`
`management of the fungicide team and also being responsible for new fungicides
`
`development. This involves a lot trials and methods involved in testing chemical
`
`compounds to determine if they exhibit relevant fungicidal activity.
`
`4.
`
`Syngenta attempted to duplicate the tests in U.S. Patent 11,445,727, as
`
`well as other combinations claimed in the ’727 Patent. The protocol was as
`
`follows.
`
`Field Test – 1 (2020/2021)
`
`5.
`
`A field test was prepared with the following materials and methods:
`
`Varieties:
` M8372 IPRO, NS7667 IPRO, NA5909 RR
`
`Trial Design:
`Compl. rand. Blocks in 4 reps; plot size 18 m²
`
`Equipment:
`Backpack: 150L/ha, flat nozzle, 30 lbs.
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`Application Timing:
`A – Canopy pre closure (42 DAE of average)
`B – 14 days after application A
`C – 14 days after application B
`
`Assessment:
`% Severity – at 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42 and 49 DAAA
`% Phytotoxicity – 7, 14 Days after all applications
`% Defoliation
`Yield (kg/ha)
`
`6.
`
`The trial program is summarized in Table 1.
`
`Table 1
`
`
`Place (Brazil)
`
`Variety
`
`Planting
`Date
`
`Target
`
`Area 1
`
`M 8372 IPRO Dec-08-2020 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 2
`
`NS7667 IPRO Nov-25-2020 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 3
`
`NA 5909 RR Dec-21-2020 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 4
`
`M 8372 IPRO Dec-05-2020 P. Pachyrhizi
`
`#
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`
`** Trial 4 contained E. Piffusa as an additional target.
`
`
`7.
`
`Treatments were applied as described in Table 2, below. Solo applications
`
`(A1-A3 and A5-A7) were used to calculated synergy.
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`% Control
`
`36
`65
`48
`
`74
`
`55
`71
`55
`
`79
`
`75
`
`74
`
`Rate
`(g a.i./ha)
`30
`70
`900
`30
`70
`900
`200
`150
`1500
`200
`150
`1500
`33.8
`+
`67.5
`900
`30
`+
`70
`+
`900
`
`Active
`#
`Ingredient
`A1 Benzovindiflupyr
`A2 Prothioconazole
`A3
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`A4
`Prothioconazole
`
`Mancozeb
`A5 Benzovindiflupyr
`A6 Prothioconazole
`A7
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`A8
`Prothioconazole
`
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`
`A9
`
`A10
`
`Table 3 summarizes results of the testing.
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`Table 2
`
`
`
`8.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Table 3
`
`#
`
`Active
`Ingredient
`
`A4
`
`A9
`
`A10
`
`A8
`
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`
`Isolated
`A.I. %
`Control for
`Expected
`Action
`Calculation
`36
`
`64
`
`48
`36
`
`64
`
`48
`
`36
`
`64
`
`48
`55
`
`71
`
`55
`
`Rate
`g a.i
`/ha
`
`30
`+
`70
`+
`900
`33.8
`+
`67.5
`+
`900
`30
`+
`70
`+
`900
`200
`+
`150
`+
`1500
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`Expected
`Action
`(by
`Colby)
`
`Rust
`(%Control
`Observed)
`
`Difference
`Between
`Observed
`and
`Expected
`
`89
`
`74
`
`-15
`
`89
`
`75
`
`-14
`
`89
`
`74
`
`-15
`
`94
`
`79
`
`-15
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`Field Test – 2 (2021/2022)
`
`9.
`
`A field test was prepared with the following materials and methods:
`
`Varieties:
` M 7739, NA 5909, HO Aporé and M 8372
`
`Trial Design:
`
`Compl. rand. Blocks in 4 reps; plot size 18 m²
`
`Equipment:
`
`Backpack: 150L/ha, flat nozzle, 30 lbs.
`
`Application Timing:
`
`A – Canopy pre closure (42 DAE of average)
`
`B – 14 days after application A
`
`C – 14 days after application B
`
`Assessment:
`
`% Severity – at 0, 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42 and 49 DAAA
`
`% Phytotoxicity – 7, 14 Days after all applications
`% Defoliation
`Yield (kg/ha)
`
`
`
`The trial program is summarized in Table 4.
`
`
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`10.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`Table 4
`
`
`
`# Place (Brazil) Variety
`
`Planting
`Date
`
`Target
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`Area 4
`
`M 7739 Dec-03-2021 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 5
`
`NA 5909 Dec-22-2021 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 6
`
`HO Aporé Dec-29-2021 P. pachyrhizi
`
`Area 7
`
`M 8372 Dec-01-2021 P. Pachyrhizi
`
`11.
`
`Treatments were applied as described in Table 5, below. Solo applications
`
`(B1-B6) were used to calculated synergy.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`% Control
`
`55
`67
`55
`54
`61
`52
`
`69
`
`69
`
`76
`
`76
`
`Rate
`(g a.i./ha)
`30
`70
`45
`75
`1125
`60
`30
`+
` 60
`1125
`30
` +
`45
` +
`75
`1125
`33.8
`+
`67.5
`1125
`30
`70
`1125
`
`Active
`#
`Ingredient
`B1 Benzovindiflupyr
`B2
`Prothioconazole
`B3
`Cyproconazole
`B4
`Difenoconazole
`B5
`Mancozeb
`B6
`Azoxystrobin
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Azoxystrobin
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Cyproconazole
` +
`Difenoconazole
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
` +
`Prothioconazole
`Mancozeb
`
`Benzovindiflupyr
`
`B10 Prothioconazole
`
`Mancozeb
`
`
`
`B9
`
`B7
`
`
`
`B8
`
`Table 5
`
`
`
`12.
`
`Table 6 summarizes results of the testing.
`
`
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`Table 6
`
`#
`
`Active
`Ingredient
`
`B7
`
`B8
`
`B9
`
`B10
`
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Azoxystrobin
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Cyproconazole
`+
`Difenoconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`Benzovindiflupyr
`+
`Prothioconazole
`+
`Mancozeb
`
`Isolated
`A.I. %
`Control for
`Expected
`Action
`Calculation
`55
`
`52
`
`61
`55
`
`55
`
`53
`
`61
`55
`
`67
`
`61
`55
`
`67
`
`61
`
`Rate
`g a.i
`/ha
`
`30
`+
`60
`+
`1125
`30
`+
`45
`+
`75
`+
`1125
`33.8
`+
`67.5
`+
`1125
`30
`+
`70
`+
`1125
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`Expected
`Action
`(by
`Colby)
`
`Rust
`(%Control
`Observed)
`
`Difference
`Between
`Observed
`and
`Expected
`
`92
`
`69
`
`-23
`
`96
`
`69
`
`-27
`
`94
`
`76
`
`-18
`
`94
`
`76
`
`-18
`
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`13.
`
`This data is a true and correct representation of the results of internal
`
`testing.
`
`14.
`
`I have reviewed the data shown above and confirm that the were tested
`
`using the process described above. I can also confirm that the disease control
`
`percent observed was insufficient to meet the synergy as defined by the Colby
`
`Formula.
`
`15.
`
`I recognize that in providing this Declaration, it may be used as evidence in
`
`the above-captioned proceeding. I accordingly agree to appear for cross-
`
`examination within the scope of this Declaration and at a convenient time should
`
`the same be requested.
`
`16.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
`
`America that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`
`
`
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`Case PGR2023-00017
`U.S. Patent No. 11,445,727
`
`January 30, 2023
`Date:
`São Paulo, Brazil
`City/State Country
`if outside of the US
`
`At:
`
`Signature:
`
`Caio Barbosa Prates
`CPD Fungicide Manager Brazil
`Syngenta Crop Protection AG
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
