An essential part of construction: Federal Court revisits the test for whether a claim element is essential or non-essential
Boehringer v JAMP, 2024 FC 1198 was an action under the PMNOC Regulations concerning infringement and validity of two patents relating to...Read More
Federal Court of Appeal upholds Federal Court’s summary trial finding of patent invalidity
Background The Federal Court of Appeal has rarely upheld or granted a finding of invalidity in the context of a summary trial;...Read More
Federal Court of Appeal echoes the Federal Court smart speaker decision
Justice Locke, writing a unanimous decision for the Federal Court of Appeal in Google LLC v Sonos Inc., 2024 FCA 44, dismissed...Read More
Janssen’s stranglehold strengthens: Evidence important in indirect infringement
Janssen scored another victory in relation to Canadian Patent No. 2,659,770 in Janssen v Apotex. Janssen sought to prevent Apotex from selling...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
Federal Court Dismisses Action for Patent Infringement by Summary Trial
In February 2018, the Plaintiffs, ViiV Healthcare Company, Shionogi & Co Ltd, and ViiV Healthcare ULC filed a lawsuit against the Defendant,...Read More
Canada Proposes Introducing Patent File Wrapper Estoppel
Bill C-86, the Budget Implementation Act is an 884 page omnibus bill recently introduced in Parliament. Among a myriad of other items, the...Read More
Clean Sweep for Teva in VELCADE Patent Action
In a Judgment dated July 18, 2018, Justice Locke allowed Teva’s claim for section 8 damages in relation to its bortezomib product,...Read More
It’s all About Construction
Valeant’s Canadian Patent No. 2,524,300 claims a modified-release bupropion tablet with three parts: a core comprising the active ingredient and various excipients;...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
API Fails To Remove Excalibre: API’s Torque Anchor Patents Invalid Or Not Infringed
Excalibre Oil Tools Ltd. v. Advantage Products Inc. concerns the validity and infringement of three Canadian patents. Justice Manson held that the...Read More
A Quick Proceeding for Quick Couplers – Summary Trial Finding of Patent Non-infringement
On October 6, 2016, Justice Southcott dismissed Cascade’s patent infringement action against Kinshofer in a motion for summary trial. Kinshofer did not...Read More
Trial Judges Entitled To Some “Leeway” On Construction
On September 6, 2016, the Court of Appeal dismissed Nova Chemicals Corporations appeal from a judgment finding its SURPASS product infringes Canadian...Read More
Court of Appeal Upholds Promised Utility Of Iron Chelation Patent
On September 15, 2016 the Court of Appeal dismissed Teva’s appeal Justice O’Reilly’s prohibition Order preventing the Minister of Health from approving...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 straightens out scope of orthodontic patent
In Orthoarm Inc v GAC International LLC, 2015 ONSC 5097, Justice Matheson of the Ontario Superior Court held that certain orthodontic brackets...Read More
Pot-shots from the sidelines not enough to disprove inherent anticipation
On June 15, 2015, Justice Barnes released his public Judgment and Reasons in a prohibition application involving Mylan and Canadian Patent No....Read More
What does that patent say, anyway? Appellate review of patent construction
In two recent judgments, Cobalt v. Bayer and ABB v Hyundai, the Federal Court of Appeal has explicitly considered the appropriate standard of review for...Read More
Relitigation is not an abuse of process where first decision is under appeal
On September 11, 2015, Justice Gleason released her public Judgment and Reasons in a prohibition application involving Apotex and Canadian Patent No. 2,379,948...Read More
Court of Appeal primes Supreme Court of Canada to revisit appellate review of claim construction and prohibition against methods of medical treatment
On May 4, 2015, the Federal Court of Appeal released its Reasons for Judgment in an appeal in a prohibition application involving...Read More
Process steps an essential limitation in YASMIN product-by-process claims
On May 29, 2013, Justice O’Reilly of the Federal Court of Canada, released his Reasons for Judgment in a prohibition application between Bayer...Read More
Federal Court of Appeal issues another decision dealing with “promise of the patent” [ARIMIDEX/anastrozole]
On April 11, 2012, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Mylan’s appeal of a decision of Justice Rennie (2011 FC 1023) which...Read More
Regeneron’s VEGF-TRAP-EYE infringes Genentech’s UK Patent
On March 22, 2012, Justice Floyd of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice held that Regneron’s VEGF-TRAP-EYE infringes European...Read More
RITUXAN and AVASTIN do not infringe Sanofi’s CMV enhancer patents
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently upheld a summary judgement decision that neither rituximab nor trastuzumab infringes two Sanofi...Read More