Birds of a Feather Will Not Flock Together: Section 6.02 of PM(NOC) Regulations Prohibits Trials of Common Issues Absent Consent
The Federal Court of Appeal set aside a Federal Court order requiring a trial of common issues from two separate actions initiated...Read More
Degree of Care is a Relevant Consideration in Assessing Javelo Likelihood of Confusion
On April 20, 2020, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Clorox’s appeal from a decision of Justice Grammond of the Federal Court...Read More
Court of Appeal dismisses Pfizer’s motion to strike PM(NOC) action as abusive
The Court of Appeal recently determined that the institution of proceedings under the “new” PM(NOC) Regulations, is not re-litigation or an abuse...Read More
Court of Appeal Jettisons Uncertain “Inventive Concept” in Obviousness Analysis
The Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in the appeal from the successful patent impeachment action by SNF challenging the validity...Read More
Court of Appeal Reaffirms Filing Date As Relevant Date for Assessing Sufficiency of Disclosure
On July 24, 2017, the Federal Court of Appeal released its Reasons for Judgement in Idenix’s appeal involving the drug sofobuvir, the...Read More
Court of Appeal Clarifies Meaning Of “Inventive Concept”
On April 11, 2017 the Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in BMS’ appeal from a Judgment of the Federal Court...Read More
Plavix 1’s “Inventive Concept” Did Not Change the Definition Of Obviousness – Federal Court of Appeal
On April 11, 2017 the Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in BMS’ appeal of a Judgment dismissing a prohibition application...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
Clash of the Pizzarias: Federal Court of Appeal Rejects Pizza Restaurant’s Trademark
In Pizzaiolo Restaurants Inc. v. Les Restaurants La Pizzaiolle Inc., 2016 FCA 265, the Federal Court of Appeal allowed an opposition against...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
Federal Court of Appeal Rewrites Standard of Review
Needless to say, the issue of the standard of review applicable to orders of both judges and prothonotaries has been one of...Read More
Well Done, not Burnt: STK Trade-Mark Maintained
In The One Group LLC v Gouverneur Inc, the Federal Court of Appeal allowed The One Group’s appeal and maintained the registration...Read More
Federal Court cannot by its own motion punt copyright claim to more convenient forum
In Sadhu Singh Hamdard Trust v Navsun Holdings Ltd, 2014 FC 1139, the Federal Court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims of copyright and...Read More
No Changing On the Fly – Court of Appeal Dismisses Substitutive Intervention in Hockey Skate Trade-Mark Dispute
In 2011, Easton requested that the Registrar of Trade-marks issue a section 45 notice requiring Bauer to show that they had used...Read More
The Requirement to Consider Fresh Evidence on Trade-Marks Appeals
Cathay Pacific Airways Limited v Air Miles International Trading B.V., 2015 FCA 253 addressed the issue of fresh evidence on appeals relating...Read More
Generics are “patentees” subject to PMPRB oversight
The recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Attorney General of Canada v. Sandoz Canada Inc., and Attorney General of...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
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
Its Alive! Court of Appeal resurrects clopidogrel enantiomer patent
On July 24, 2013, the Federal Court of Appeal released its Reasons for Judgment in an appeal involving Canadian Patent No. 1,...Read More
Enantiomers are not innovative drugs – Federal Court of Appeal
On January 18, 2013, the Federal Court of Appeal, in a 2:1 decision, released its Reasons for Judgment holding that Takeda’s dexlansoprazole...Read More