Allergan’s eyedrop patent withstands the Federal Court’s gaze
Allergan commenced a patent infringement action against Juno, alleging that Juno’s proposed bimatoprost product would infringe claims 16 and 19 of Allergan’s...Read More
Allergen’s “Food Effect” patent is valid but infringement by Apotex was not on the menu
Background Justice Kane of the Federal Court found Canadian Patent 2,602,188, listed on the Patent register for ACTONEL DR (used for...Read More
Patentee may file its own reply in PM(NOC) action
In August 2019, Allergan commenced an action under section 6(1) of the PM(NOC) Regulations against Apotex and HRA Pharma in which it...Read More
Court prefers blinded expert in ophthalmic drug patent dispute
In Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344, Allergan sought a prohibition order against Apotex in relation to its gatifloxacin ophthalmic...Read More
Apotex’s application for leave to appeal COMBIGAN prohibition order dismissed
On May 9, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) dismissed Apotex’s application for leave to appeal of a prohibition Order order issued...Read More
Wrongly issued COMBIGAN prohibition order upheld for different reasons
On November 23, 2012, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal of Justice Hughes’ Judgment granting a prohibition Order in respect...Read More
Court grants prohibition order despite obviousness finding; cites uncertainty in comity law as basis
On June 18, 2012, the Federal Court of Canada issued a Judgment and Reasons for Judgment in a prohibition proceeding between Allergan...Read More
FDA’s biosimilar stakeholder submission roundup – Part III
In March 2010, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) became law and established a legal pathway for the...Read More
Trospium (SANCTURA XR) patents obvious – US District Court
On March 31, 2012 Judge Sleet of the District Court for the District of Delaware concluded that the claims of four...Read More