Patents

Case summaries and articles about  patents.

August 8, 2016

Knowledge of Related Patents not “Actual Knowledge” for Awarding Pre-Issuance Damages

In U.S. patent infringement, the “actual notice” requirement in 35 USC § 154(d) requires actual knowledge of a published patent application. Knowledge of related patents, even those sharing a description, and indirect references to a published patent application in emails may not be sufficient to prove actual notice.
August 2, 2016

FC Denies Data Protection for Ester of a Previously Approved Medicinal Ingredient

2015 FC 959 - The Health Minister denied data protection for Cysview after finding it was not an “innovative drug”, and the FC indicated the scope of “innovative drug” does not extend to combinations of the enumerated variations of previously approved medicinal ingredients in the Regulations (salt, ester, enantiomer, solvate or polymorph).
May 20, 2016

Software Patent Lines are Drawn: USPTO Comments on Enfish and TLI Communications Decisions

In the Enfish case, the Federal Circuit confirmed the patentability of a “self-referential” database invention as not being directed to an abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In the TLI Communications, the Federal Circuit found a proposed invention of classifying and storing digital images using a telephone unit to be abstract.
May 6, 2016

Law Remains Unsettled Regarding Appropriate Date for Assessing Obviousness-type Double Patenting

2015 FC 875 - The FC noted that the law is unsettled when it comes to determining the appropriate date for assessing obvious-type double patenting.
April 26, 2016

PCK StartIP Series: 1 – Patent Budgeting for Lean Startups

We have prepared a guide that outlines the timelines and major spend points for two common patent filing strategies: a global patent filing and US-only patent filing.
April 22, 2016

Federal Court Finds “Rigidification” Patent to be Sufficient but Obvious

2015 FC 997 - The FC found that the invention was merely to add a polymer to the slurry, which was known in the prior art, and to continue to do so until the slurry rigidified. The Court found this solution to be obvious to try, and sufficiently disclosed, even though the meaning of “rigidify” was never made clear.
April 22, 2016

Gilead Successfully Invalidates Patent Jeopardizing Its Sovaldi Product

2015 FC 1156 - The FC found that Idenix’s patent was invalid for a lack of utility, demonstrated or soundly predicted, and for insufficient disclosure.
April 11, 2016

FC Dismisses Prohibition Application – Favours Respondent’s “Blinded Expert” Evidence

2015 FC 570 - The FC favoured the respondent’s "blinded expert" evidence in which the experts provided their opinions before knowing what was claimed in the disputed patents.
April 5, 2016

Strike Two: Second Prohibition Application Regarding Mylan’s Proposed Tadalafil Tablets Denied

2015 FC 125 - The existing patent was invalid on the grounds of lack of utility for having made a promise of utility that could not be demonstrated nor soundly predicted, was anticipated by a previous patent of the applicant that claimed an overlapping dosage range, and was also therefore made obvious by the same previous patent.
March 30, 2016

FCA Nods To SCOTUS, Recommends The Use Of The Clear Error Standard Of Review In Claim Construction Where Expert Evidence Plays A Significant Role

2015 FCA 116 - The FCA advised that where expert evidence plays a significant role, claim construction might involve subsidiary factual disputes reviewed on a palpable and overriding error standard, which is equivalent to the United States clear error standard.
February 26, 2016

Provisional Patent Application Contradicts Formal Patent, Invalidates Claims for Indefiniteness

The CAFC took issue with inconsistent statements between a provisional patent application and the subsequent formal patent and invalidated a number of the patent’s claims for being indefinite.
February 22, 2016

Intellectual Property Services Buyer’s Guide

There are a lot of IP service providers out there. In this post I attempt to provide some guidelines for helping companies to assess IP counsel and choose the right one.
February 10, 2016

FCA Endorses Non-Infringing Alternatives as a Relevant to Patent Damages

2015 FCA 171 - The FCA determined that it is relevant to damages whether the infringer had a non-infringing alternative that it could have used.
November 30, 2015

FCA: Generic pharmaceuticals also subject to price regulation

2015 FCA 249 - The Federal Court of Appeal clearly stated that the price regulation provisions apply not only to literal patent holders, but also to exclusive licensees of patents.
November 23, 2015

CAFC to Rehear On-Sale Bar Novelty Case

The CAFC has now granted a petition for a rehearing the case on this issue of whether or not the sale of bivalirudin from the supplier gave rise to an on-sale bar.
November 16, 2015

Federal Court Skirts Provincial Property Law and Transfers Patent Ownership

Imperial Oil Resources Ltd v Exxonmobil Upstream, 2015 FC 1218 - The Federal Court has finally stated outright that it has the jurisdiction to vary patent ownership without encroaching upon the realm of provincial contract law.
October 7, 2015

Relitigating Conceded Claims is an Abuse of PM(NOC) Proceedings

Gilead Sciences, Inc v Canada (Health), 2015 FC 610 - Gilead's assertion that its patent is valid would be relitigating old issues and an abuse of PM(NOC) proceedings.
October 6, 2015

FCA Nudges SCC to Consider that Claim Construction should be Reviewed on Reasonableness Standard

Abb Technology AG, ABB Inc v Hyundai Heavy Industries Co, Ltd, 2015 FCA 181 - The FCA suggested that although claim construction is reviewed on a correctness standard, claim construction is so heavily reliant on expert witnesses that perhaps it should be reviewed on a palpable and overriding error standard.
October 2, 2015

United States adopts Divided Infringement Test

Akamai Technologies, Inc, v Limelight Networks, Inc, 09-1372 - The CAFC held that where more than one actor is involved in infringing the steps in a patent, one of the actors can be held liable for the entirety of the infringement if that actor “directs or controls the other’s performance.”
September 30, 2015

ONSC Takes On US Patent Claim Construction

OrthoArm Incorporated v GAC International, LLC, 2015 ONSC 5097 - The ONSC was to undertake the analysis that would normally be done at a Markman hearing: to perform claim construction on the US patent and apply that construction to determine whether there is infringement.