Markwell Clarizio LLP

infringement

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

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 »

Generic Manufacturers Induce Patent Infringement by Recommending Use of a Patented Dosing Regimen in their Product Monographs

In Apotex v Janssen (2024 FCA 9) and Pharmascience v Janssen (2024 FCA 10), the Federal Court of Appeal held that Apotex and Pharmascience would induce patent infringement by recommending that their respective generic products be sold and used according to the dosing regimen claimed in Janssen’s 335 Patent. Apotex Inc. v. Janssen Inc. –

Generic Manufacturers Induce Patent Infringement by Recommending Use of a Patented Dosing Regimen in their Product Monographs Read More »

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part III

Co-written with Dino Clarizio This is the third of a series of three posts discussing some of the issues addressed by the trial judge (McVeigh J.) in NCS v Kobold, 2023 FC 1486. The three issues we discuss are those that arise less frequently in patent cases. They are: Topic 1: Priority Date (Post #1)Topic

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part III Read More »

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part II

Co-written with Dino Clarizio This is the second of a series of three posts discussing some of the issues addressed by the trial judge (McVeigh J.) in NCS v Kobold, 2023 FC 1486. The three issues we discuss are those that arise less frequently in patent cases. They are: Topic 1: Priority Dates (Post #1)Topic

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part II Read More »

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part I

Co-written with Dino Clarizio In a complex patent infringement action involving five NCS patents and one Kobold patent relating to tools and sleeves used in oil well drilling, the Federal Court (per McVeigh J.) held that NCS’s patents were invalid and not infringed, and that Kobold’s patent was valid and infringed by NCS. As a

Three Interesting Issues Raised in the NCS/Kobold Patent Action – Part I Read More »

Inducing Infringement with a Skinny Label: FCA Weighs-In

The Federal Court of Appeal (Locke JA writing for the Court) held that Apotex will induce infringement of patent claims to a combination of two active ingredients to treat a condition even though Apotex is seeking approval to market only one of the active ingredients as a monotherapy for the same condition. https://lnkd.in/gkb9faVi Janssen is the

Inducing Infringement with a Skinny Label: FCA Weighs-In Read More »

Angelcare v Munchkin: Entitlement to Infringement Remedies

Co-written with Dino Clarizio The Federal Court of Canada (per Roy J.) decided four issues of entitlement to remedies in an action where he had previously held that the defendants’ products sold in Canada infringed valid claims. The issues were 1) entitlement to injunctive relief; 2) entitlement to an accounting of profits; 3) entitlement to

Angelcare v Munchkin: Entitlement to Infringement Remedies Read More »