Patents

Case summaries and articles about  patents.

July 25, 2017

FC Awards Costs Award at 50% Elevation of Tariff B Due to Poor Conduct

Pollard Banknote Limited v Babn Technologies Corp, 2016 FC 1193 Poor conduct during patent litigation can result in significantly elevated costs awards, even if the conduct […]
July 18, 2017

Federal Court of Canada Dismisses Motion for Interlocutory Injunction and Orders Security for Costs

2016 FC 606 - The FC dismissed TearLab’s application for an interlocutory injunction preventing I-MED from selling its i-Pen System, and ordered TearLab to pay security for costs.
July 5, 2017

FC Strikes PM(NOC) Application Due to No Chance of Success

2016 FC 525 - The Federal Court granted Celltrion’s motion to strike Janssen’s application pursuant to section 6(5)(b) of the PM(NOC) Regulations.
June 30, 2017

Canada’s Supreme Court Abolishes Controversial “Promise Doctrine”

2017 SCC 36 - The Supreme Court of Canada struck down the “promise doctrine” of Canadian patent law in favour of merely requiring a single use related to the nature of the subject-matter of the invention having a scintilla of utility.
June 27, 2017

ICSID Tribunal dismisses Eli Lilly’s NAFTA claim against Canada

Case No. UNCT/14/2 - An ICSID Tribunal dismissed Eli Lilly’s claim against Canada, which was brought in relation to two Canadian patents owned by Eli Lilly that had been invalidated for failing to provide the utility they promised.
June 20, 2017

FC Finds Torque Anchor Patents Invalid or Not Infringed and Violation of Section 7(a) of Trade-marks Act

2016 FC 1279 - The FC found that API violated section 7(a) of the Trade-marks Act by making false or misleading statements tending to discredit the business, goods, or services of Excalibre, when it sent cease and desist letters to some of Excalibre’s customers.
June 13, 2017

FC Denies Prohibition Order Request; Finds Expert Blinding Persuasive But Not Primary Interest

2016 FC 382 - The FC concluded that Apotex’s allegations of non-infringement in respect of Shire's Canadian Patent were justified and accordingly denied Shire’s requested prohibition order.
June 6, 2017

Allergan fails to demonstrate to FC that Apotex’s allegations of invalidity are not justified

2016 FC 344 - Apotex alleged in its Notice of Allegation and submissions that the ‘632 Patent was invalid because it was obvious and lacked utility. The FC found that the allegation was justified.
May 30, 2017

Federal Court of Appeal reverses Federal Court’s finding of a settlement agreement between Apotex and Allergan

2016 FCA 155 - The FCA overturned a FC decision in which it was held that the parties had settled the litigation, and had issued an order enforcing the terms of the settlement. The FCA found that a settlement had not in fact been reached, set aside the FC’s order and granted Apotex its appeal and costs.
May 23, 2017

SCOTUS Lands a Blow Against Patent Trolls by Limiting Patent Litigation Venues

581 U.S. ___ (2017) - SCOTUS reaffirmed one of its previous holdings to find that the proper venue for bringing a patent infringement suit against a domestic corporation is either where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular place of business.
May 16, 2017

Dow Awarded an Accounting of Profits including Springboard Profits from Infringer’s Ramped-up Sales

2017 FC 350 - The Federal Court outlined in this decision how the Dow Chemical Company should be compensated by Nova Chemicals Corporation for its infringement of Dow’s patent.
May 9, 2017

Apotex’s Claims for Damages for Delayed Market Entry Allowed to Proceed

2017 ONSC 224 - Apotex sought compensation from Eli Lilly for damages suffered for delayed entry to the market for its generic version of olanzapine; the ONSC ordered Eli Lilly to pay Apotex a total of $20,000.
May 2, 2017

FCA Finds Provincial Limitation Periods May Apply to Patents Subject to the Old Patent Act

2017 FCA 9 - The FCA affirmed the FC decision that AstraZeneca’s patent was valid and infringed, accepted Apotex’s appeal with respects to limitation periods, and rejected AstraZeneca’s cross-appeal regarding punitive damages.
April 25, 2017

Federal Court finds foreign, non-exclusive licensee entitled to damages

2016 FC 593 - The FC awarded Janssen Canada and Janssen US almost $19 million in total damages for Teva's infringement of a Japanese entity's patent, for which Janssen US had never even exercised its licence in Canada.
April 11, 2017

FC Determines Improper Priority Claims Are Not Untrue Material Allegations

2016 FC 320 - The FC found that many of the claims in Uponor’s patent were invalid, rejected the untrue material allegation argument and found that several of the remaining claims were infringed by Heatlink and Pexcor.
April 4, 2017

FCA holds FC erred by rejecting relevance of non-infringing alternatives

2017 FCA 23 - The FCA found that the FC had erred by rejecting the relevance of non-infringing alternatives available to Apotex, so as to reduce the accounting of profits award to ADIR for infringement of its patent. The single issue was remitted back to the FC.
March 28, 2017

Federal Court of Appeal dismisses appeal for one of the biggest costs awards ever

2017 FCA 25 - The FCA dismissed Nova’s appeal of a FC judgment, which awarded Dow $6.5 million for costs in their successful action for patent infringement.
March 23, 2017

Canadian 2017 Budget Plan: A Focus on Innovation and IP

2017 Budget Plan - The Canadian Federal Government announced its Budget Plan for 2017, which proposes a number of positive changes to the Canadian intellectual property regime.
March 14, 2017

Federal Court Grants Prohibition Order on Generic Psoriasis-treating Ointment

2015 FC 1237 - The FC heard and granted an application by Leo Pharma to prohibit Teva Canada from being issued a Notice of Compliance under the PM(NOC) Regulations.
March 10, 2017

Federal Court implies that it only has jurisdiction to expunge or vary titles to patents, not record documents to them

2016 FC 1092 - The FC heard and granted an order to vary the records of the Patent Office for Canadian Patent No. 2,630,594, but refused to order the recording of documents to it.