A one-two pulse for Takeda’s dexlansoprazole patent found not infringed and invalid
The Federal Court found Takeda’s Canadian Patent No. 2,570,916 to be invalid for lack of utility and sufficient disclosure and to be...Read More
Takeda’s dexlansoprazole patent found invalid for lack of sound prediction of utility and for insufficiency
Background The drug DEXILANT is used to treat heartburn associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease and to heal damage to the esophagus from...Read More
Provisional injunction granted: no “unclean hands” in royalty dispute
In Cameo Knitting v Kodiak Group Holdings (2024 QCCS 292), the Quebec Court of Appeal decided whether to issue a provisional injunction...Read More
A triumph in trademark appeal: Backordered realities
Finastra International Ltd. v Fenestrae B.V. is an appeal from a Trademark Opposition Board decision to maintain certain goods and services on...Read More
False IP complainants get shrunken bank accounts
Keezio Group and The Shrunks’ Family Toy Company were market competitors who sold inflatable beds for children through Amazon.com. Keezio brought a...Read More
PMPRB prevails in obtaining financial disclosure
Justice Fothergill dismissed Galderma’s judicial review application of the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board’s redetermination decision concluding Galderma’s Patent pertained to its...Read More
Preventous et al. still unsuccessful in accessing information to support their judicial review
The Federal Court of Appeal continues to decline the efforts of three private health clinics to obtain information from Health Canada to...Read More
Federal Court finds US supply disruptions relevant to Apotex’s ability to supply the Canadian abiraterone market
In the context of Apotex’s section 8 action against Janssen, Janssen brought a motion under Rule 51 of the Federal Courts Rules...Read More
Abuse of process remains alive under the Regulations
The Federal Court of Appeal’s decision in Janssen v. Apotex (here) harkens back to its 2007 decision Sanofi-Aventis v Novopharm (here) and...Read More
The Federal Court declines to order Apple to disclose the personal information of John Doe defendants who downloaded apps from the App Store
Background In Seismotech IP Holdings Inc. v. Apple Canada Inc., 2023 FC 1649, the Federal Court dismissed a motion by Seismotech for...Read More
Adidas cannot use “Terrex” name for W. 4th Ave store in Vancouver
The British Columbia Supreme Court issued an interlocutory injunction against adidas Canada, restraining it from using “TERREX” as the name of its...Read More
Harley-Davidson cruises to victory in defending its trademarks
Background Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. v. Montréal Production Inc., 2023 FC 1727 consisted of the appeals of decisions from the Trademarks Opposition...Read More
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
A tale of two DRAGONAS
This case involves two related companies that had been using the same trademark based on an informal understanding. After many years of...Read More
Dedicating a patent can block a double patenting argument
Justice McVeigh has added new considerations when considering a double patenting argument in AbbVie v JAMP Pharma, 2023 FC 1520. The double-patenting...Read More
Permanent injunction declined in spite of infringement
Justice McVeigh’s recent decision in AbbVie Corporation v JAMP Pharma is noteworthy because it is one of the few cases to refuse...Read More
Anticipation test takes the middle ground
Justice McVeigh’s recent decision has addressed an area of debate within the jurisprudence and academic commentary regarding the proper legal test for...Read More
Admissibility of expert evidence is best left to the trial judge
McCain commenced a patent infringement action against Simplot, asserting that Simplot had infringed McCain’s 841 Patent directed to a process used for...Read More
Analysing the “Core of the invention” in overbreadth and utility
The Federal Court in NCS Multistage Inc. v. Kobold Corporation, 2023 FC 1486 considered the validity of five patents owned by the...Read More
Can a party make invalidity arguments against dropped claims?
In NCS Multistage Inc. v Kobold Corporation, 2023 FC 1486 Justice McVeigh determined whether NCS could raise invalidity arguments against non-asserted claims...Read More
Complex proceedings yield elevated lump sum costs for Kobold
Justice McVeigh recently awarded Kobold Corporation and Promac Industries Ltd. elevated lump sum costs in what may have been “the most complex...Read More
Breaking invention chains: non-final unity objections need not “force” a divisional
In NCS v Kobold, the Federal Court explained the circumstances in which a double patenting argument could apply in the context of...Read More
An inventive concept dies and becomes the “spirit of the invention”
In NCS v Kobold, the Court explained that the inventive concept of a patent is not the “spirit of the invention” as...Read More
Apotex receives divided success on its motion to amend on the eve of trial
With only a few days remaining before trial, Apotex brought a motion to amend its Further Amended Statement of Defence to include...Read More
Not Trading Places: Federal Court Clarifies the Role of the Attorney General on Judicial Review Applications
The Federal Court recently clarified the role of the Attorney General of Canada (AGC) on applications for judicial review. The AGC has...Read More