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 […]
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 »
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
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
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. –
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 »
