Notice and Notice Regime Does Not Provide Legal Basis for Identifying Alleged Copyright Infringer
Justice Boswell’s decision in Voltage Pictures, LLC v. John Doe, 2016 FC 881, confirms that amendments to sections 41.25 and 41.26 of... 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
Scratching Beyond The Surface: Court Revisits File Wrapper Estoppel
In Pollard Banknote Limited v BABN Technologies Corp, Justice Locke held that Canadian Patent No. 2,752,551 was invalid and, in the alternative,... 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
Charity not a “public authority” for purposes of official marks
On July 11, 2016 Justice Russell granted Starbucks (HK) Limited’s (not the coffee maker) application to review and set aside the Registrar’s... 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
Code Words Result In NOA Insufficiency
In Bayer Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi Canada Ltd., Justice Brown of the Federal Court granted Bayer’s prohibition application relating to the drug moxifloxacin... Read More
AstraZeneca’s Attempt to Vary Judgment Based on Subsequent Finding of Infringment Rejected
In 2012, Justice Hughes held that Apotex was entitled to section 8 damages by reason of AstraZeneca’s unsuccessful prohibition application in respect of... Read More
NOV Downhole Fails to Pierce the Corporate Veil
In NOV Downhole Eurasia Limited v. TLL Oilfield Consulting Ltd., 2016 FC 685, NOV appealed an Order of Prothonotary Milczynski (acting in... Read More
Cold Calls and Conflicts: Sikes v. Encana Corporation
In Sikes v Encana Corporation, Justice Bell held that Smart & Biggar should not be removed as counsel for Encana. The plaintiffs... Read More
Dude, That’s Not Your Code: Claim for Computer Authorship Denied
In Andrews v McHale, 2016 FC 624, Justice Southcott dismissed an application for declaratory relief and damages for alleged copyright infringement and... Read More
Xpresspost and Registered Mail: Two Sides of the Same Coin
In Biogen v Attorney General of Canada, Justice Elliott held that use of the Xpresspost service of Canada Post constitutes delivery to... 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
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
Any publicly available teaching, no matter how obscure, is citable for obviousness – Court of Appeal
The Patent Act was amended in 1993 to to require that an invention cannot be obvious to the skilled person having regard to information that was... Read More
Court Re-affirms the Importance of Affidavit Evidence on a Motion for Particulars
On April 5, 2016 Justice LeBlanc released his Order and Reasons in Stryker Corporation v. Umano Medical Inc., 2016 FC 378. The... Read More
Court of Appeal narrows, but does not resolve, relevant date for assessing double patenting
On April 20, 2016 the Court of Appeal dismissed Mylan’s appeal of a prohibition Order in respect of Mylan’s proposed tadalafil product.... 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
Hey Trademark Infringer You’re No Friend of Mine – Mister Transmission obtains injunction against Master Transmission
Responsive Brands operates throughout Canada as “Mister Transmission”. Responsive Brands is the owner of Canadian Trademark 239,868 for MISTER TRANSMISSION registered in... Read More
Copycat Caught – Fair dealing is no defence when 100% of work is copied
On March 8, 2016, Justice Manson held that PS Knight Co Ltd infringed copyright in the Canadian Standards Association’s 2015 CSA Code.... Read More
Fears and Tears Insufficient to Warrant Interim Injunction
On March 24, 2016, Justice Russell dismissed TearLab’s motion for an interim injunction that sought to prevent I-Med Pharma Inc. from marketing... Read More
Strong Possibility of Future Drug Patent Infringement Survives Motion to Strike
On March 21, 2016, Justice Barnes dismissed an appeal of Prothonotary Tabib’s Order that refused to strike a pleading based in quia... Read More
Keep it Together: Federal Court Upholds Decision Refusing Bortezomib Bifurcation
On March 15, 2016, Justice Diner of the Federal Court released his Order and Reasons in Teva Canada Limited v. Janssen Inc.,... Read More
Half the Battle is Showing Up: Default Judgment Withstands Appeal
In David Michaels v Michaels of Canada, Justice Rennie of the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the defendants’ appeal of the default... Read More