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 […]
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 »
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 »
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 »
On August 8, 2025, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) held that Amgen Inc. (“Amgen”), a biosimilar manufacturer, was not required to address Bayer Inc.’s (“Bayer”) newly issued patent (the “315 Patent”) for EYLEA (aflibercept) under the PM(NOC) Regulations because it had not been added to the Patent Register when Amgen’s New Drug Submission
On June 13, 2025, the Federal Court (per McHaffie J) held that J.R. Simplot Company (“Simplot”) did not infringe a patent owned by McCain Foods (“McCain”) by applying an electric field to uncooked potatoes before cutting them into French fries. McCain owned Canadian Patent No. 2,412,841 (“Patent”) until its expiry in 2021. The Patent claimed
McCain’s Patent Action Zapped By Pulsed Electric Field Read More »
