Patent Infringement
October 5, 2021
The actual notice requirement of § 287 is only satisfied when the recipient is informed of the identity of the patent and the allegedly infringing activity.
August 23, 2021
The Federal Court of Appeal's observations on the use of prosecution history demonstrate that courts continue to adapt to recent amendments to patent law.
March 26, 2021
2021 FC 85: The Federal Court upheld the validity of all claims, but found that PetroChina was not infringing Maoz Betser-Zilevitch's patent for an SAGD.
February 1, 2021
2021 FCA 7: The FCA narrowly interpreted section 53.1 of the Patent Act, refusing to look at a corresponding US application that was not named by number.
October 27, 2020
2020 FCA 141: Court warns judges not to be "spooked" by the enormous sums that may be calculated in an accounting of profits for patent infringement.
September 10, 2020
Fed. Cir. 2019-1622: The CAFC found the same preamble created different limitations for different patents, limiting one patent but not the other.
August 10, 2020
Fed. Cir. 2019-2041 - The CAFC held that Packet Intelligence was precluded from claiming $3.5M in pre-suit damages because the marking requirement was not met.
June 18, 2020
In a patent infringement case between two major ice skate manufacturers, the Federal Court clarified s. 53.1 and the admissibility of prosecution history.
March 9, 2020
2020 FCA 30; 2020 FCA 31 – Janssen and Celltrion will return to court in June after the FCA overturned a lower court decision regarding a Remicade patent.
December 19, 2019
Fed. Cir. 2018-2087 - Plastic Omnium was unsuccessful in proving patent infringement because the patents used a "special definition" of the word "parison".