Circumstances Not Sufficiently Special To Allow Pleading Amendment
On February 6, 2018, Justice Dunphy dismissed Sanofi’s motion for leave to amend their statement of defence in light of “special circumstances”,...Read More
Apo-Esomeprazole Section 8 Action Dismissed Due to Infringement
Apotex Inc. v. AstraZeneca Canada Inc, is the Federal Court’s decision regarding Apotex’s section 8 action, and AstraZeneca’s related infringement action, in relation...Read More
Patent Infringers Cannot Elect Patentee’s Remedy
The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’ appeal from a decision in which Apotex sought to elect the remedy that Bayer was...Read More
“Overpromising” following Esomeprazole SCC
In this decision, Justice Manson was called upon to decide whether certain amendments Apotex sought to make to its pleadings ought to...Read More
Subject Matter Of A Compound Claim Cannot Be Expanded Beyond What It States – FCA
On September 18, 2017, the Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in BMS’ appeal of a decision dismissing its prohibition application...Read More
Apotex Seeks Rehearing of NEXIUM Patent Validity Following Supreme Court’s Decision
On August 29, 2017 Apotex filed a motion with the Supreme Court of Canada, requesting a rehearing of the appeal and an...Read More
Desvenlafaxine Polymorph Patent Not Obvious – Federal Court
The Federal Court simultaneously issued a pair of prohibition orders against Teva and Apotex in relation to the drug desmethyl-venlafaxine succinate, which...Read More
Supreme Court Breaks The “Promise Doctrine” In NEXIUM Patent Dispute
On June 30, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada released its judgment in AstraZeneca v. Apotex, a case dealing with the utility...Read More
Sufficiency Only Requires A Description Of One Way Of Making The Inventive Product
On January 12, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal of Justice Barnes decision (see our previous post here) holding Canadian Patent...Read More
Decision To Not File Evidence On Motion To Dismiss Sinks Prohibition Application
On December 8, 2016 Prothonotary Aalto dismissed Valeant’s prohibition application against Apotex regarding metformin as an abuse of process. Apotex’s Notice of...Read More
Apotex’ Remedial Claims Based On Pfizer’s Viagra Patent Survive Another Attack
On November 18, 2016, Justice Nordheimer of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Pfizer’s motion for leave to appeal a decision...Read More
Does Double Patenting Have A Relevant date? Perhaps
In Apotex Inc. v Eli Lilly Canada Inc., the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal of the Federal Court decision that...Read More
Earlier PM(NOC) Loss Does Not Disentitle Patentee From Electing Infringement Remedy
Justice Fothergill’s recent decision establishes that a prior favourable decision under the NOC Regulations cannot be relied upon by a generic pharmaceutical...Read More
Putting Your (Other) Best Foot Forward: Party May Introduce New Evidence or Argument in Subsequent Infringement Action
On September 19, 2016, Prothonotary Tabib granted, in part, Apotex’ motion to amend its statement of defence and counterclaim in an infringement...Read More
Conference call transcript sinks TRUVADA combination patent
On August 19, 2016, the Federal Court released the public judgment and reasons by Justice Brown in 2016 FC 856. The case...Read More
Prohibition Order Granted Against Generic VIREAD Product
On August 23, 2016, the Federal Court released the public judgment and reasons by Justice Brown in 2016 FC 857. The case...Read More
On to the next round: Some of Apotex’s claims for being kept off the sildenafil market survive motion to strike
In Apotex Inc. v. Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals et al., 2016 ONSC 4966, Pfizer was looking to strike out claims brought against it...Read More
Court Refuses to Bifurcate Section 8 Counterclaim from Olopatadine Infringement Action
In Alcon Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 898, Prothonotary Tabib dismissed Alcon’s motion to bifurcate its infringement action from...Read More
Save It For The Action: Filgrastim Appeal Dismissed As Moot
In Amgen v Apotex, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Amgen’s appeal of the Federal Court decision that dismissed Amgen’s application for...Read More
Necessity Not the Only Test for Parties Seeking to be Added to a Proceeding
Justice Kane’s decision in Apotex Inc. v. Minister of Health, 2016 FC 776, has clarified that not all parties will be required...Read More
Need for the Court to make a proper determination weights heavily in Apotex’ motion for reply evidence
Background On November 10, 2015, Justice, Hughes dismissed Amgen’s application an Order preventing the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of...Read More
Expert blinding not determinative in ADDERALL XR prohibition application
On April 7, 2016., Justice Locke released his Judgment and Reasons in a prohibition application involving Shire, Apotex and the latter’s proposed...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
Supreme Court of Canada To Hear AstraZeneca’s Esomeprazole Appeal
On March 10, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada granted AstraZeneca’s application for leave to appeal the decision of the Federal Court...Read More
Court dismisses first biologic prohibition application
Amgen brought this prohibition application to prevent the issuance of a Notice of Compliance to Apotex for its proposed filgrastim product. The...Read More