An Expiring Patent Will Get Its Day in Court under Section 6 of the PM(NOC) Regulations
Should an action under section 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations be rendered moot if the asserted patent will...Read More
Product Monographs Given Flexible Reading Informed by Patent Analysis
In Janssen Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2019 FC 1355, the Federal Court granted Janssen’s application for an order prohibiting the Minister of...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
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
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
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 amends Judgement to reflect Reasons
In AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 671, Justice Barnes of the Federal Court amended his previously issued Judgement in...Read More
Inventive concept need not be coterminous with promised utility
On July 6, 2015 the Federal Court of Appeal released it decision on AstraZeneca’s appeal of Justice Rennie’s decision holding that the...Read More
Apotex barred from raising validity issues during assessment of damages
On September 16, 2014 Prothonotary Lafrenière dismissed Apotex’s motion for leave to file an amended Responding Statement of Issues. Apotex sought to...Read More
Lions and Tigers and Bears Oh My! SEROQUEL XR formulation patent obvious
On March 7, 2013, Justice Near of the Federal Court of Canada, dismissed AstraZeneca’s prohibition applications against Teva in respect quetiapine fumarate...Read More
Technical complexity a lion in the path of NEXIUM obviousness challenge
Om March 5, 2013, Justice O’Keefe of the Federal Court of Canada released Reasons for Judgment in a prohibition application involving Ranbaxy...Read More
Court has broad discretion to order production of pharmaceutical samples – Rule 249
On February 19, 2013, the Federal Court of Appeal, in series of three decisions clarified that the Rule 249 provides the Court...Read More
AstraZeneca and Amgen team up to develop five human monoclonal antibodies
AstraZeneca and Amgen have announced an agreement to jointly develop a portfolio of Amgen’s clinical stage human monoclonal antibodies. The antibodies subject...Read More
US Court upholds validity of quetiapine formulation patent (SEROQUEL XR)
On March 28, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, in a 100 page opinion, held that AstraZeneca’s...Read More
Quetiapine Formulation Patent Obvious – U.K. High Court
On March 22, 2012, the U.K. High Court of Justice, Chancery Division held that AstraZeneca’s patent covering an sustained release formulation of...Read More