The high-profile legal battle between Impossible Foods and Motif FoodWorks over the use of meaty-tasting heme proteins in plant-based meat has finally come to a close after two and a half years of costly wrangling over intellectual property. The dispute, which began in March 2022 when Impossible Foods filed a lawsuit accusing Motif of infringing patents covering the use of heme proteins in meat alternatives, has seen numerous twists and turns, including accusations of covert information gathering and patent invalidations.
Impossible Foods, a pioneer in the plant-based meat industry, initially accused Motif FoodWorks of IP theft, arguing that Motif’s HEMAMI heme protein infringed on its patents. Impossible’s flagship heme protein is identical to soy leghemoglobin, a naturally occurring protein found in the nodules attached to the roots of nitrogen-fixing plants such as soy. This protein is crucial for imparting the meaty taste and aroma to Impossible’s plant-based meat products. On the other hand, Motif FoodWorks’ HEMAMI heme protein is identical to bovine myoglobin, found in the muscle tissue of cows. Both companies produce their heme proteins via precision fermentation using genetically engineered yeast.
The legal drama intensified when Motif accused Impossible of hiring private investigators to “covertly” obtain information about Motif’s products. Although the court found that this action did not violate rules of professional conduct, it added a layer of intrigue to an already complex case. The US Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently invalidated one of Impossible Foods’ patents involved in the lawsuit following a challenge by Motif, but denied requests to review six other patents at issue in the litigation.
Motif argued that the parties’ proteins were different and that many of the inventions claimed in Impossible Foods’ patents were obvious and disclosed in prior art. This argument gained some traction with the invalidation of one patent but ultimately did not lead to a broader dismissal of Impossible’s claims.
Under an agreement filed with a court in Delaware today, the warring parties, including Ginkgo Bioworks, which was added as a defendant during the litigation, have agreed to dismiss the case with prejudice. This means that the case cannot be brought back to court, effectively ending the dispute. Each party will bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, a resolution that suggests both sides may have recognized the escalating costs and uncertainties of prolonged litigation.
The case, officially titled Impossible Foods v. Motif FoodWorks, Case #1:22-cv-00311, has significant implications for the plant-based meat industry. The resolution allows both companies to focus on innovation and market competition rather than legal battles. For Impossible Foods, the outcome preserves the majority of its patent portfolio, allowing it to continue leveraging its soy leghemoglobin technology. For Motif FoodWorks, the dismissal provides relief from the immediate threat of litigation, enabling it to push forward with its bovine myoglobin-based products.
The broader industry takeaway is a reminder of the high stakes involved in the rapidly growing plant-based meat sector. Intellectual property remains a critical battleground as companies strive to differentiate their products and protect their innovations. The case also underscores the importance of clear and robust patent strategies, as well as the potential for disputes to drain resources and divert attention from core business objectives.
While the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment, the resolution of this case marks a significant moment in the ongoing evolution of plant-based food technology. As both Impossible Foods and Motif FoodWorks return their focus to the marketplace, consumers and investors alike will be watching closely to see how these companies leverage their unique technologies to capture market share in a competitive and rapidly expanding field.