On March 20, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Locke J.A., Roussel J.A., and Heckman J.A.) (“FCA”) released an important decision in the patent dispute between ProSlide and WhiteWater, two competitors in the water slide industry. The ruling restores the validity of three of ProSlide’s patents relating to water slides but confirms that WhiteWater […]
On February 25, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (per De Montigny C.J., Webb J.A. and Pamel J.A.) (“FCA”) upheld a Federal Court decision (discussed in our previous blog post) that Promotion in Motion Inc. (“PIM”)’s trademarks SWISSKISS and SWISSKISS & Design (in association with Swiss chocolate) were not registrable in light of Hershey Chocolate
Federal Court of Appeal: Don’t Kiss Online Trademark Confusion Surveys Goodbye Read More »
On January 22, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Locke J.A, Roussel J.A., and Goyette J.A.) (“FCA”) upheld the Federal Court’s (“FC”) ruling that certain claims in AP&C ADVANCED POWDERS & COATINGS INC.’s Canadian Patents Nos. 3,003,502 and 3,051,236 (collectively, the “AP&C Patents”) were ambiguous and therefore invalid. This decision is notable for at
Ambiguity Strikes Again: The Court of Appeal Finds the Claims Ambiguous Read More »
Co-authored with Marc Mitri On January 16, 2026, the Federal Court (per McHaffie J) held that the Trademarks Opposition Board (“Board”) erred in refusing registration of Products Unlimited, Inc.’s (“Applicant”) FILTER DESIGN trademark. Of note, this was the first judicial decision to consider the interpretation of subsection 56(5) of the Trademarks Act (effective April 1,
In a decision issued January 9, 2026, the Federal Court of Appeal (per LeBlanc JA, Roussel JA, and Heckman JA) (“FCA”) upheld the Federal Court’s (“FC”) decision to maintain three of Coors Brewing Company’s (“Coors”) trademark registrations related to beer products (collectively “the Trademarks”). The FC had held there were special circumstances that excused the
Co-authored with Emily Johnston On November 28, 2025, the Federal Court of Appeal (Per Woods JA and Laskin JA) (“FCA”) held that the Federal Court (per Pallotta J) (“FC”) did not err in (1) enjoining Samsung Bioepis (“Samsung”) and Biogen, et al (collectively “Biogen”), as well as their licensees, from using the trademark BYOOVIZ in
Patients Are A Relevant Consumer in the Trademark Confusion Analysis For Biosimilars Read More »
On December 1, 2025, Health Canada announced the creation of a joint program with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to support the establishment of a Request for Information Sharing (RIS) program for generic drugs. Specific commitments and timelines under this program have not yet been released. The RIS program is intended to facilitate
Co-authored with Adam Haller On November 12, 2025, the Federal Court (per Whyte Nowak J.) held that the Commissioner of Patents (the “Commissioner”) made several errors of law in finding that an application for a “Method for Playing a Card Game” did not qualify as patentable subject matter under the Patent Act. The Court remitted
Federal Court Goes All-In on Claim Construction in Assessing Patentable Subject Matter Read More »
In the latest chapter of the Adeia Guides Inc. (formerly “Rovi”) (“Adeia”) and Videotron Ltd. (“Videotron”) patent infringement battle, Adeia alleged that Videotron infringed four patents within the same family related to digital entertainment technologies. Videotron denied infringement and counterclaimed for invalidity on the basis of anticipation, obviousness, and in the case of one patent,
Common Design Infringement Finds its Footing in Canada Read More »
Co-authored with Adam Haller Now that spooky season is over, it is the perfect time to check your trademark portfolio for “mutant” trademarks that may still be lurking. Companies frequently update their brands and logos. Over time, small changes can add up, and a trademark being used in the market may deviate significantly from, and
Who’s Afraid of a Little Old Mutant Trademark? Read More »
