Markwell Clarizio LLP

IP Decisions

Supreme Court of Canada Dismisses Application for Leave in Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 9 and Pharmascience Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 10

On June 27, 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the applications for leave to appeal in Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 9 and Pharmascience Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 10, both Federal Court of Appeal decisions pertaining to inducing infringement of a patented dosing regimen. We published […]

Supreme Court of Canada Dismisses Application for Leave in Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 9 and Pharmascience Inc. v. Janssen Inc. et al., 2024 FCA 10 Read More »

Federal Court Grants an Application to Add Inventors and an Owner to an Issued Patent

 On May 31, 2024, the Federal Court (Tsimberis J.) granted an application to correct the inventorship of an issued patent. The decision provides a clear explanation of the relevant legal principles (Patent Act, s. 52) and the type of evidence that must be led to obtain relief. Smith Sport Optics, Inc. v. Canada (Commissioner of

Federal Court Grants an Application to Add Inventors and an Owner to an Issued Patent Read More »

Court Dismisses Passing Off and Expungement Action After Summary Trial

This was a motion for summary trial in a passing off and expungement case between competitors in the mobile video game market. The Court (per Fuhrer J.) held that summary trial was an appropriate vehicle for deciding the Plaintiff’s claims for passing off and expungement of the Defendant’s registration – and that those claims were

Court Dismisses Passing Off and Expungement Action After Summary Trial Read More »

Federal Court Re-Iterates that the Fair Dealing Exception to Copyright Infringement is Fact Specific

On May 31, 2024, the Federal Court (Roy J) released its decision on the summary judgment motion brought by the Attorney General of Canada (“AGC”) on behalf of Parks Canada, in which he dismissed Blacklock’s Reporter’s (“BR”) copyright infringement action against the AGC. This matter is one of several related and contextually similar actions brought

Federal Court Re-Iterates that the Fair Dealing Exception to Copyright Infringement is Fact Specific Read More »

Red Maple Manufacturing Inc. v. Red Maple Bio Inc. 2024 FC 817

On May 29, 2024, the Federal Court (Whyte Nowak J.) granted Red Maple Manufacturing Inc.’s (the “Applicant”) appeal pursuant to subsection 56(1) of the Trademarks Act. The Applicant appealed a decision from the Trademarks Opposition Board (“the Board”) ordering the removal of certain goods from the Applicant’s Trademark Registration. Red Maple Manufacturing Inc. v. Red

Red Maple Manufacturing Inc. v. Red Maple Bio Inc. 2024 FC 817 Read More »

Parliamentary Committee Issues Report on PMPRB Reform. Calls for “Comprehensive Response” by the Government

Parliamentary Committee Issues Report on PMPRB Reform. Calls for “Comprehensive Response” by the Government On May 6, 2024, Canada’s Standing Committee on Health (“HESA”) issued a report containing “ten recommendations on how the Government of Canada can enable the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (“PMPRB”) to more effectively carry out its mandate and implement its

Parliamentary Committee Issues Report on PMPRB Reform. Calls for “Comprehensive Response” by the Government Read More »

Federal Court of Appeal Interprets “Use” in Section 42 of the Patent Act

The Federal Court of Appeal (per Heckman J.A.) dismissed an appeal by Steelhead LNG (ASLNG) Ltd. and Steelhead LNG Limited Partnership (collectively, “Steelhead”) from a summary trial judgment dismissing Steelhead’s patent infringement action. This appeal turned on the meaning of “use” under section 42 of the Patent Act. Steelhead LNG (ASLNG) Ltd v Arc Resources

Federal Court of Appeal Interprets “Use” in Section 42 of the Patent Act Read More »

Federal Court of Appeal Confirms That Cialis Patent is Invalid

The Federal Court of Appeal (per Locke JA.) affirmed a trial decision in which claims in Lilly’s patent covering physiologically acceptable salts of tadalafil were found to be invalid for overbreadth and insufficiency. The principal issue on appeal was the proper construction of the claim term “physiologically acceptable”, though the Court’s obiter statements regarding the

Federal Court of Appeal Confirms That Cialis Patent is Invalid Read More »

Federal Court Finds Flaws in Online Survey Evidence and Reminds About Descriptive Certification Marks

The Federal Court (Tsimberis J.) dismissed an appeal by Promotion in Motion, Inc. (“PIM”) from a Trademark Opposition Board (“Board”) decision refusing PIM’s applications to register its SWISSKISS mark and SWISSKISS & Design mark in association with “chocolate of Swiss origin”. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionary LLC (“Hershey”) successfully opposed PIM’s applications based on Hershey’s registered

Federal Court Finds Flaws in Online Survey Evidence and Reminds About Descriptive Certification Marks Read More »

Federal Court Determines Admissibility of Testimony from Fact Witnesses who Authored Prior Art

In Medexus Pharmaceuticals v Accord Healthcare (2024 FC 424), Justice Pallotta dismissed the plaintiffs’ (“Medexus”) patent infringement action after finding that the patent at issue (“662 Patent”) was invalid for obviousness. The 662 Patent related to concentrations of subcutaneously injected methotrexate solutions used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis/psoriatic arthritis. The decision addresses an interesting

Federal Court Determines Admissibility of Testimony from Fact Witnesses who Authored Prior Art Read More »