Markwell Clarizio LLP

Menu
Contact Us

appeal

Patients Are A Relevant Consumer in the Trademark Confusion Analysis For Biosimilars

Trademarks /

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 »

The FCA Digs Into Downhole Hydraulic Fracturing Patent

IP Decisions /

Co-authored by Delara Emtyazi (Student-at-Law) In a decision issued October 20, 2025, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Walker J.A. with Stratas J.A. and Monaghan J.A. concurring) (“FCA”) held that the Federal Court (per McVeigh J) erred in construing the claims of Kobold Corporation’s (“Kobold”) Canadian Patent No. 3,027,571 (“‘571 Patent”) and as a result,

The FCA Digs Into Downhole Hydraulic Fracturing Patent Read More »

Nordik’s Appeal of Obviousness Finding for its Snow Plow Patents Gets Blown Over

IP Decisions /

The Federal Court of Appeal (per Locke J.A. with Leblanc J.A. and Pamel J.A. concurring) (“FCA”) held that the Federal Court (per St.-Louis J.) did not err in finding that several claims of Nordik Blades’ (“Nordik”) three patents on snowplow blades were invalid for obviousness. Usinage Pro-24 Inc. v. Valley Blades Ltd., 2025 FCA 4

Nordik’s Appeal of Obviousness Finding for its Snow Plow Patents Gets Blown Over Read More »

De novo appeal of a trademark expungement dismissed on the basis that new evidence did not demonstrate “use”

IP Decisions, Trademarks /

In a decision by Southcott J., the Federal Court agreed with the Registrar of Trademarks (the “Registrar”) that Limbic Media Corporation (“Limbic”) did not establish continuous use of its registered trademark and ordered the registration expunged. There was no evidence confirming that Limbic’s trademark was sufficiently associated with its goods at the time the goods

De novo appeal of a trademark expungement dismissed on the basis that new evidence did not demonstrate “use” Read More »

FCA holds that Confidential Disclosure does not Anticipate. Foreign Company is Liable for Infringement by “Common Cause”

IP Decisions /

On September 27, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) affirmed that four patents owned by AngelCare Canada (“AngelCare”) are valid and were infringed by the manufacture and sale of diaper pail cassettes by Munchkin Baby Canada Inc. (“Munchkin Canada”) and its US parent, Munchkin, Inc. (“Munchkin USA”). The decision raises important issues relating to

FCA holds that Confidential Disclosure does not Anticipate. Foreign Company is Liable for Infringement by “Common Cause” Read More »

Rovi #2: Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Interactive Television Program Guide Patents Are Invalid (Rovi ats. Bell and Telus)

IP Decisions /

  On August 6, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Gleason JA; Stratas and Monaghan JJA, concurring) held that two patents owned by Rovi Guides [Rovi] were invalid. Nonetheless, in obiter, the FCA provided clarification on the circumstances in which an accounting of profits and a permanent injunction are available as remedies for patent

Rovi #2: Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Interactive Television Program Guide Patents Are Invalid (Rovi ats. Bell and Telus) Read More »

Rovi #1: Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Interactive Television Program Guide Patents Are Invalid (Rovi ats. Videotron)

IP Decisions /

  On August 6, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Gleason JA; Stratas and Monaghan JJA, concurring) held that two patents owned by Rovi Guides [Rovi] were invalid for obviousness. Nonetheless, in obiter, the FCA held that the trial judge erred in several aspects of his remedial analysis, including the correct approach for deciding

Rovi #1: Federal Court of Appeal Confirms Interactive Television Program Guide Patents Are Invalid (Rovi ats. Videotron) Read More »

FCA holds that Anticipation by Publication is a Difficult Defence to Establish

IP Decisions /

On August 19, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (per Locke JA; Woods and Laskin JJ.A., concurring) held that a patent claiming a specific herbicide (flucarbazone sodium) for the selective control of wild oats was not anticipated by two prior patents disclosing genera of herbicides for a variety of uses. Agracity Crop v. Upl Na

FCA holds that Anticipation by Publication is a Difficult Defence to Establish Read More »

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

IP Decisions /

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

IP Decisions /

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 »