litigation
June 11, 2019
AVX Corporation v Presidio Components (Fed. Cir., 2018-1106) A case recently dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) confirms that […]
May 7, 2019
Fed. Cir., 2016-2222 - CAFC affirms that a patent may be successfully defended if the patent holder can prove that the invention was conceived prior to any similar prior art.
May 1, 2019
2019 FC 406 - FC confirms that registered owner is not precluded to submit new evidence on appeal if no evidence is submitted after receiving s.45 notice from the Registrar.
March 21, 2019
2018 FCA 192 – FCA confirms CEEO Orders may be granted in unusual circumstances.
August 28, 2018
2017 FC 874 - Aitken Klee disqualified from representing Betser-Zelevitch because one of its partners had acted for Nexen in the same action, while at another law firm.
May 8, 2018
2017 ONSC 7276 - The ONSC found that Rowland's statement of claim did not disclose a reasonable cause of action with regard to the allegation that his "trade secret" was stolen.
December 5, 2017
2017 FC 826 - The FC declined to approve, or disapprove, Seedlings' litigation funding agreement with Bentham, where Bentham would fund Seedlings' patent litigation against Pfizer. The FC found that it lacked jurisdiction, as contractual matters are generally provincial in nature, and that only agreements related to class action proceedings would require the approval of the FC.
November 21, 2017
2017 FCA 215 - The FCA found that trademarks owned by Travelway were confusingly similar to, and passing off on, trademarks owned by Wenger. The FCA's finding reversed a prior decision of the FC.
October 24, 2017
2017 FC 548 - In this application for judicial review over s. 5 of the PM(NOC) Regulations, the FC agreed with the AG who argued that since another innovator also had patents listed on the Patent Register pertaining to products to which Innovator Company made comparisons, the other innovator was a necessary respondent to the application.
October 3, 2017
2016 FC 986 - The FC dismissed Supertek's claim that Mishan engaged in conduct contrary to Section 7(a) of the Trade-marks Act, in relation to a Canadian patent.