Boehringer v. JAMP continued: the Federal Court’s look at anticipation and sound prediction of utility
The Federal Court’s recent decision in Boehringer v JAMP, 2024 FC 1198 concerned two patents relating to nintedanib capsules (which Boehringer markets...Read More
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
Reply evidence report allowed in part as it aids the Court in determining merit
Background In Justice Furlanetto’s recent decision in Boehringer v JAMP, the Court returned to first principles in deciding whether to allow a...Read More
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
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
Venlafaxine Section 8 Damage Award Reaffirmed Upon Redetermination
Back in 2014, the Federal Court issued its judgment in Teva’s section 8 damages action in relation to the drug venlafaxine. On...Read More
Aitken Klee successful in Teva Olanzapine Section 8 Damages Case
The Federal Court recently issued its decision in Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited, 2017 FC 88, Teva’s action for...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