Last updated: August 17, 2026
The specification should include a complete detailed description of the plant and the characteristics that distinguish it from related known varieties. This description must also be expressed in botanical terms in the general form followed in standard botanical text books or publications dealing with the varieties of the kind of plant involved (evergreen tree, dahlia plant, rose plant, apple tree, etc.) rather than a broad non-botanical characterization such as commonly found in nursery or seed catalogs. The Latin name of the genus and species of the plant should also be stated. Where color is a distinctive feature of the plant, the color should be identified in the specification with a designated color as given by a recognized color dictionary as opposed to generic color names.
The specification should also include the origin or parentage of the plant variety sought to be patented and must point out where and in what manner the variety of plant has been asexually reproduced. Where the plant variety originated as a newly found seedling, the specification must fully describe the conditions (cultivation, environment, etc.) under which the seedling was found growing to establish that it was not found in an uncultivated state. Specimens of the plant variety, its flower or fruit, should not be submitted unless specifically called for by the examiner.
Plant patent drawings are not mechanical drawings and should be artistically and competently executed. The drawing must disclose all the distinctive characteristics of the plant capable of visual representation. When color is a distinguishing characteristic of the new variety, the drawing must be in color. Two duplicate copies of color drawings must be submitted. All color drawings should include a one-inch margin at the top for Office markings when the patent is printed.
COPYRIGHT ©
, TORREY PINES LAW GROUP, PC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. | LEGAL NOTICES | SITE MAP
Torrey Pines Law Group, PC serves technology innovators with protecting intellectual property, obtaining regulatory approvals and clearances, and making deals and closing technology transactions throughout the U.S., including in major technology hubs such as San Diego, San Francisco, Palo Alto, San Jose, Silicon Valley, Boston, Cambridge, Chicago, Minneapolis, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, Denver, Seattle, Portland, Boulder, Orlando, the Research Triangle (Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill), the Mid-Atlantic (New Jersey, New York, Philadelphia, Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC), Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Ann Arbor, and throughout Southern California in Los Angeles, Orange County, Irvine, Torrey Pines, Sorrento Valley, and La Jolla.
We have experience with international intellectual property, regulatory and transactional matters pending in Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou China; Tokyo, Japan; Berlin, Munich and Frankfurt Germany; Tel Aviv Israel; Mumbai, Bengaluru, and New Delhi India; London and Edinburgh United Kingdom; Vancouver, Toronto, Calgary and Montreal Canada; Dublin, Ireland; Cape Town, South Africa; Mexico City and Tijuana Mexico; Brussels, Belgium; Copenhagen, Denmark; Paris, France; Madrid and Barcelona Spain; Moscow, Russia; Santiago, Chile; Montevideo, Uruguay; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro Brazil; Seoul, South Korea; Taipei, Taiwan; Hong Kong; Hanoi, Vietnam; Bangkok, Thailand; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Milan, Italy; Singapore; Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide Australia; Auckland, New Zealand; Oslo, Norway; Stockholm, Sweden; Helsinki, Finland; Kiev, Ukraine; Budapest, Hungary; Vienna, Austria; Prague, Czechia; Geneva and Lausanne Switzerland; Bahrain; Doha, Qatar; Abu Dhabi and Dubai UAE; and Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.