Alice Corp v CLS Bank, No 13–298, 573 US ____ (2014) - The US Supreme Court rejected patent claims that “relate to a computerized scheme for mitigating ‘settlement risk’" for being drawn to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement. Merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform that abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention.
Apotex Inc v Pfizer Canada Inc, 2014 FC 159 - The Court confirmed that bifurcation of a PM(NOC) proceeding is not limited to liability/damages, and held that “[i]t is open to the Court to bifurcate any issue which will result in the saving of time, cost and judicial resources.” The issue need not be a threshold issue determinative of the proceedings.
Mediatube Corp. and Northvu Inc v Bell Canada et al, 2014 FC 237 - The Court dismissed a motion to remove Bereskin & Parr as solicitors of record for Mediatube for a conflict of interest, finding that “[w]hile there may be some circumstances where related companies could be considered as one entity and one client, the circumstances in the present case do not lead to that conclusion.”
Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc v Teva Canada Limited - 2014 FCA 69 - The Court stated that whether there can be recovery for unauthorized indications under section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations is a question of fact, and that the purpose of section 8 damages is to compensate generics for a delay caused by NOC Proceedings.
Kirouac-Couture c ERL Étude et Recherche Inc, 2014 QCCQ 1405 - The Court held that ERL’s failure to provide the relevant disclosure vitiates Couture’s consent to enter the contract for preparation of the patent application.
Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc v Teva Canada Limited - 2014 FCA 65 - The Court dismissed Sanofi’s appeal to amend its statement of defence in a PM(NOC) proceeding. It is not sufficient that allowing the amendment would not be unjust. What is required is that any injustice to the other party is capable of being compensated by an award of costs and the interest of justice must be served.
Pfizer Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2014 FCA 54 - The Court rejected Pfizer's argument that the trial judge did not properly apply the R. v. J.-L.J., 2000 SCC 51 case when assessing the admissibility of what Pfizer alleged were novel scientific theories put forth by Apotex’s expert.
Valeant Canada LP v Canada (Health), 2014 FCA 50 - The Court dismissed an appeal from the Federal Court’s decision to grant Valeant’s motion to disqualify Cobalt’s in-house lawyer from any further involvement in the application before the Court on the ground that he could be presumed to have Valeant’s confidential information.
Valeant Canada LP v. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals – 2013 FC 1254 Cobalt moved, pursuant to s. 6(5)(b) of the PM(NOC) Regulations, to dismiss as an abuse of […]
Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC – 2014 FC 38 In this case Pfizer brought a prohibition application under the PM(NOC) Regulations to prevent the […]
University of California v Commissioner of Patents [2014 FC 80] Background The Applicant – University of California – sought judicial review pursuant to s. 18.1 […]
Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals v Apotex Inc. [2014 FCA 13] Background This is an appeal of the summary judgment decision of Justice Zinn where he declared a […]
Gilead Sciences Inc. v Canada (Health) [2013 FC 1270] Bristol-Myers Squibb v Canada(Health) [2013 FC 1271] Gilead Sciences Inc. v Canada(Health) [2013 FC 1272] Background […]
Re. Patent Application 2,333,184 CD 1345 Background The patent application at issue is for an automated method of classifying or sorting plant embryos of […]
Re. Patent Application 2,223,198 CD 1344 Background Patent application 2,223,198 is for a nutritional composition that has successfully caused Chrohn’s disease to go into […]
Re: Patent Application 2,237,960 CD 1342 Background The application relates to the manufacture of precipitated calcium carbonate from impure calcium oxide. On 17th of […]