Markwell Clarizio LLP

Menu
Contact Us

canada

Government of Canada Responds to Parliamentary Committee Report on PMPRB Reform

Uncategorized /

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 reforms” (“Report”). HESA called on the Government of Canada to “table a comprehensive response […]

Government of Canada Responds to Parliamentary Committee Report on PMPRB Reform 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 Makes Rare Holding that Patent Claims are Invalid for Ambiguity

IP Decisions /

Co-authored by Emily Papsin The Federal Court recently held (per McHaffie J.) that the impugned claims of two related patents for an additive manufacturing process (3D printing) were invalid and not infringed because an essential element (“depletion layer”) was ambiguous. Tekna Plasma Systems Inc. v. AP&C Advanced Powders & Coatings Inc., 2024 FC 871 Background

Federal Court Makes Rare Holding that Patent Claims are Invalid for Ambiguity Read More »

Markwell Clarizio LLP is a Contributor to the Chambers Life Sciences 2024 Global Practice Guide

Announcements /

Chambers and Partners has recently published its 2024 Life Sciences Global Practice Guide. Markwell Clarizio LLP is very pleased to have been invited to be the exclusive author of the Canadian sections of this comprehensive practice guide which is considered the “definitive global law guide offering comparative analysis from top ranked lawyers”. In the Canadian

Markwell Clarizio LLP is a Contributor to the Chambers Life Sciences 2024 Global Practice Guide Read More »

Snowplow Patents are Snowed Under due to Federal Court Findings of Obviousness

IP Decisions /

The Federal Court (per St-Louis J.) held that the asserted claims of three patents owned by Nordik Blades (collectively, the “Nordik Patents”) are invalid on the basis of obviousness. However, the Court found that the asserted claims are not overbroad and the Nordik Patents are not void under section 53 of the Patent Act. The

Snowplow Patents are Snowed Under due to Federal Court Findings of Obviousness Read More »

Federal Court Finds Takeda’s Patent Not infringed and Invalid for Inutility and Insufficiency

IP Decisions /

The Federal Court (per Furlanetto J.) held that Takeda’s 916 Patent covering aspects of its DEXILANT® capsules is not infringed by Apotex’s proposed generic dexlansoprazole capsules and, in any event, is invalid for inutility (lack of sound prediction) and insufficiency. Takeda Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. – Federal Court (fct-cf.gc.ca) The Court’s infringement and validity

Federal Court Finds Takeda’s Patent Not infringed and Invalid for Inutility and Insufficiency Read More »

Litigating Patents in Canada Compared to the U.S.A.

Uncategorized /

Some commentators have said the Inter Partes Review process and various U.S. Supreme Court decisions have recently made enforcement of patent rights in the United States more challenging. As a result, some patentees have looked abroad to places like Europe (especially Germany) to enforce their patent rights. But what about Canada? Why should an American

Litigating Patents in Canada Compared to the U.S.A. Read More »

Federal Court Determines the Inventive Concept of an Improved Drug Formulation

IP Decisions /

In this Federal Court decision (per Pentney J.), the plaintiffs Allergan and AbbVie (“Allergan”) were successful in upholding the validity of their 691 Patent. The defendant (“Juno”) conceded that its proposed generic drug product would infringe the 691 Patent. The main issues before the Court were obviousness and sufficiency. Allergan v Juno, 2023 FC 1686

Federal Court Determines the Inventive Concept of an Improved Drug Formulation Read More »