Pharmaceutical inventions have been the subject of special provisions in the past, the likes of which have not been applied to other inventions. Furthermore, pharmaceuticals are the subject of much government regulation outside of the patent system.
- Filter by
- Categories
- Tags
- Show all
- Article
- Confusion
- Contract
- Copyright
- Corporate
- Domain Names
- Employment
- Expungement
- Expungement
- Grey Marketing
- Industrial Designs
- Licensing
- Obviousness
- Opposition
- Passing Off
- Patent
- Patent Infringement
- Patent Strategy
- PCK News
- PM(NOC)
- Procedure
- Prosecution
- Services
- Summary
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark
- Use
- Validity
- Abandonment
- Abstract Theorems
- Abuse of Process
- Accounting of Profits
- Alice/Mayo Test
- Ambiguity
- Anticipation
- Appeal
- Apple
- Artificial Intelligence
- Assignment
- Bargain Theory
- Biosimilar
- Biotech Patents
- Branding
- business
- CAFC
- Canada
- Certificate of Supplementary Protection
- Chemical Patent
- CIPO
- claim
- Claim Construction
- Class Actions
- College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents
- combination drugs
- Commercial Success
- Common General Knowledge
- Confidential Information
- Confusion
- Contract
- Copyright
- Copyright Infringement
- Costs
- Counterfeit
- Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- COVID-19
- Damages
- Data Protection
- Design Patents
- Distinctiveness
- Diversity
- DNA Patents
- Domain Names
- Dosage Range
- Double Patenting
- Due Care
- E-Commerce
- Enablement
- Estoppel
- Evidence
- Expert Evidence
- Fair Use
- Federal Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- File Wrapper Estoppel
- Food and Drug Regulations
- Fraud
- funding
- Generic Drugs
- Hague Agreement
- Indefiniteness
- Induced Infringement
- Industrial Designs
- Injunction
- Innovation
- Innovative Drugs
- Insufficient Disclosure
- Intellectual Property
- Inter Partes Review
- Investors
- IP Litigation
- IP Strategy
- IP Treaty
- IPIC
- Jurisdiction
- Law Firm
- Licensing IP
- Madrid Protocol
- Methods of Medical Treatment
- Non-Infringing Alternative
- Non-Practicing Entity
- Novelty
- Obviousness
- Official Marks
- On-Sale Bar
- Overbreadth
- Ownership & Inventorship
- Passing Off
- Patent Act
- Patent Agent
- Patent Appeal Board
- Patent Application
- Patent Drafting
- Patent Fees
- Patent Infringement
- Patent Law
- Patent Lawyer
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Prosecution
- Patent Rules
- Patent Strategy
- Patent Term Adjustment
- Patent Textbook
- Patent Trolls
- Patent Validity
- Patentable Subject Matter
- Patents
- PCT
- Pharmaceutical Patent
- Pharmaceutical Pricing
- PM(NOC)
- PMPRB
- Prior Art
- Prior Disclosure
- prior use
- Priority
- Privilege
- Product Specificity
- Promise Doctrine
- Provisional Patent
- Punitive Damages
- Reinstatement
- Remedies
- SCOTUS
- Selection Patent
- Software
- Software Copyright
- Software Patent
- Sound Prediction
- Springboard Profits
- SRED
- Standard of Review
- Start-up
- Startups
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Technology
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark
- Trademark Agent
- Trademark Expungement
- Trademark Infringement
- Trademark Law
- Trademark Opposition
- Trademark Registration
- Trademarks Act
- United States
- Use
- USPTO
- Utility
March 27, 2013
March 27, 2013
Astrazeneca Canada Inc. v. Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc., 2013 FC 232 Astrazeneca brought an application under section 5 the PM(NOC) Regulations defending Canadian Patent No. 2,170,647 […]
March 26, 2013
March 26, 2013
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited, 2013 FC 283 Novartis brought two applications under the provisions of the PM(NOC) Regulations to restrain the Minister […]
March 15, 2013
March 15, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. H. Lunbeck A/S, 2013 FC 192 Apotex sought a declaration of invalidity against Lundbeck’s Canadian patent 1,339,452 (‘452) covering the serotonin reuptake inhibitor […]
March 13, 2013
March 13, 2013
AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2013 FCA 77 AstraZeneca appeals the trial court’s decision in a proceeding commenced by Apotex under s. 8 of the […]
March 13, 2013
March 13, 2013
AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited, 2013 FC 245 AstraZeneca seeks an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of Compliance to […]
March 4, 2013
March 4, 2013
Teva Canada Limited v. Novartis AG, 2013 FC 141 Novartis is the owner of Canadian Patent No. 2,093,203 (the '203 Patent) covering imatinib, the active ingredient […]
February 27, 2013
February 27, 2013
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2013 FC 142 Novartis is the owner of Canadian Patent No. 2,093,203 (the '203 Patent) covering imatinib mesylate, the […]
February 27, 2013
February 27, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. Eli Lilly, 2013 ONSC 1135 (Div. Ct.) Lilly sought leave to appeal from a decision of Justice J. Macdonald of the Ontario Superior […]
February 25, 2013
February 25, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. Astrazeneca Canada Inc., 2013 FCA 47 Apotex is the defendant to an infringement action brought by AstraZeneca. In the course of that proceeding, […]
February 25, 2013
February 25, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. Eli Lilly Canada Inc., 2013 FCA 45 This was an appeal by Apotex from a FC decision upholding the order of Prothonotary Aronovitch […]
February 21, 2013
February 21, 2013
Canada (Health) v. Celgene Inc., 2013 FCA 43 This was an appeal from a Federal Court decision granting Celgene’s application for judicial review and quashing the […]
February 11, 2013
February 11, 2013
Pfizer Canada et al. v. Pharmascience Inc., 2013 FC 120 Pfizer brought an application under the PM(NOC) Regulations to prohibit the Minister of Health from issuing […]
January 29, 2013
January 29, 2013
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited – 2013 FC 28 This application was brought by Eli Lilly Canada under the PM(NOC) Regulations, seeking an […]
January 29, 2013
January 29, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Health), 2012 FCA 322 Apotex commenced an application for judicial review of the Minister of Health’s treatment of its submission for a […]
January 29, 2013
January 29, 2013
Takeda Canada Inc. v. Canada (Health) – 2013 FCA 13 Takeda Canada appealed from the Federal Court’s decision dismissing Takeda's application for judicial review of a […]
January 22, 2013
January 22, 2013
Apotex Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories Limited, 2013 ONSC 356 In this case, Apotex claimed damages against Abbott Laboratories and Takeda Pharmaceuticals based on unjust enrichment. On […]