FCA Clarifies Threshold for Soundly Predicting Utility
Justice Locke, writing a unanimous decision for the Federal Court of Appeal in Sandoz v Janssen, 2023 FCA 221, dismissed Sandoz’s appeal... Read More
Product Monograph Carve-Outs May Not Avoid Infringement
Justice Locke, writing a unanimous decision for the Federal Court of Appeal in Apotex v Janssen, 2023 FCA 220, dismissed Apotex’s appeal... Read More
Long-Term Safety Data ≠ Longer Patent List for STELARA
The Federal Court upheld a decision of the Office of Submissions and Intellectual Property that Canadian Patent No. 3,113,837 was not eligible... Read More
Relief from the implied undertaking required before varying a confidentiality order
The Federal Court found it was inappropriate to vary the Protective and Confidentiality Order in the original action brought by Janssen against... Read More
Slips of the pen do not restore Janssen’s Zytiga Monopoly
In Janssen Inc v Apotex et al., 2022 FCA 184, the Federal Court of Appeal affirmed the invalidity of Canadian Patent No.... Read More
Onus is on (you) to Further Restrict a Protective Order
In Janssen Pharmaceutica N.V. v Apotex Inc., 2022 FC 1262, Case Management Judge Trent Horne held that where parties cannot agree on... 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
Janssen tightens its grip on treatment for vasoconstrictive diseases
In Janssen v Sandoz, the Federal Court held that Canadian Patent No. 2,659,770 was valid and would be infringed by Sandoz’s proposed... Read More
Federal Court of Appeal: A Leaf Blower is not Enough
In this case, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld the decision of Justice Locke, who found that two patents pertaining to the... 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
Court Says No to Reply Evidence, Yes Please to Prior Art
In another nod to the Supreme Court’s “litigation culture change” in Hryniak, the Federal Court rejected expert reports tendered in a motion... Read More
Recognizing the High Cost of Litigation: Federal Court Awards 50% of Actual Legal Costs
The Federal Court has traditionally calculated costs awards using the amounts specified in Tariff B of the Federal Courts Rules. There has,... 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
Federal Court Holds Biologic Patent Valid and Infringed
In the first patent action involving biosimilars, the Federal Court held that the patent was valid and infringed. The Kennedy Trust for... Read More
Federal Court Prohibits Approval Of Generic ADHD Drug
In Janssen Inc. v. Actavis Pharma Company, 2016 FC 1361, Janssen sought an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a... Read More
Without Early Working, Cross-Referenced Drug Submissions Need Not Address Listed Patents: Court of Appeal
On October 12, 2016 the Federal Court of Appeal released a number of judgments dealing with the circumstances in which a cross-referenced... 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
Appeal dismissed from motion to compel answers from examination for discovery
In Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. The Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, Madam Justice Kane dismissed Hospira’s appeal from Prothonotary Milczynski’s Order arising from... Read More
Multiple obvious paths still obvious – Federal Court
On February 26, 2015 Justice Barnes released his public reasons dismissing the second of Janssen’s prohibition applications in respect of Teva’s generic... Read More
Court rejects the notion of the person skilled in the art of the claim
On November 27, 2014, Justice Barnes dismissed the first of two of Janssen’s prohibition applications in respect of Teva’s generic version of... Read More
Relief or Relapse? Federal Court of Appeal orders re-trial of STELARA infringement case
The Federal Court of Appeal has remitted the infringement and validity action regarding AbbVie’s Canadian Patent No. 2,365,281 and Janssen’s drug STELARA... Read More
Janssen prima facie in contempt of STELARA injunction
After finding that Janssen’s STELARA products infringed AbbVie’s (formerly Abbott) Canadian Patent No. 2,365,281 (see here), Justice Hughes subsequently granted a permanent... Read More
Janssen’s low dosage oral contraception regime patent valid
On September 11, 2012, The District Court for the District of New Jersey issued it opinion in an ANDA matter between Jansen... Read More