Articles

CBA Members

Intellectual
Property

CBA Intellectual Property Section

Articles are published by the Intellectual Property Section. Members interested in posting articles are encouraged to send them to the Section by email: CBAI_P@cba.org.

Today
Today

Case Summary: Obvious-to-try analysis successful in finding invalidity

  • May 14, 2021
  • Mackenzie Jamieson

Janssen brought this infringement action against Apotex pursuant to section 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. The patent at issue, the ‘422 Patent, related to the combination of abiraterone acetate [AA] and prednisone [PN] for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Additional insight into the tests related to Anticipation and Utility

  • May 14, 2021
  • Fiona Wong and Pablo Tseng

This was an action for infringement of Canadian Patent 2,800,746 (the 746 Patent). The patent is related to pressure assisted oil recovery. Swist alleged that MEG’s use of its heavy oil extraction methods infringed the 746 Patent. MEG counterclaimed that the 746 Patent was invalid.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Admitting further evidence after parties have closed their cases

  • May 14, 2021
  • Ashley Brown and Pablo Tseng

In the midst of a patent infringement trial, Videotron brought a motion to reopen the evidentiary portion of the trial to allow the parties to adduce additional expert evidence relating to accounting of profits. Both parties had presented evidence relating to the account of profits remedy using the incremental cost approach.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Reconsideration of validity and infringement issues

  • May 14, 2021
  • Fiona Wong and Pablo Tseng

In the original action (see 2018 FC 259), Hospira sought to impeach Canada Patent No. 2,261,630 (the 630 Patent). Kennedy Trust counterclaimed for infringement of that patent, which provided treatment to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other autoimmune disorders who did not respond properly to common drugs (IRs).

Intellectual Property

Case summary: Federal Court awards declaratory and injunctive relief and $25,000 in punitive damages in trademark infringement action

  • May 14, 2021
  • Jenny Thistle

Canadian Standards Association (“CSA”) sought declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of damages against Pharma Plastic Industries Inc., alleging Pharma Plastic manufactured, distributed, offered for sale and sold in Canada pharmaceutical vials and caps bearing the CSA’s registered trademarks without permission or license.

Intellectual Property

Case summary: Federal Court confirms the applicable standard of review when new evidence is filed on appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Trademarks

  • May 14, 2021
  • Jenny Thistle

BrandStorm, Inc. appealed, under section 56 of the Trademarks Act, a decision of the Trademarks Opposition Board made on behalf of the Registrar of Trademarks, rejecting BrandStorm’s opposition to an application by Naturally Splendid Enterprises Ltd. for registration of the trademark NATERA in association with a broad range of food, beverage and nutritional products.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Allergan Inc v Sandoz Canada Inc.

  • May 14, 2021
  • Mohit Sethi

This decision is a cost award arising from a patent infringement action pursuant to subsection 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations between Allergan Inc (“Allergan”) and Sandoz Canada Inc (“Sandoz”). The underlying action related to Allergan’s exclusive license of the 2,507,002 patent (“‘002 patent”) owned by Kissei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“Kissei”).

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: The determination of appropriate disbursements cannot be sacrificed on the altar of simplicity

  • May 13, 2021
  • David Schnittker

Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”) appealed a judgment of the Federal Court (2018 FC 1106) awarding Shire LLC (“Shire”) $1M in costs, and $600,000 in disbursements following its success at trial on a patent infringement action under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) (“PM(NOC)”) Regulations. Apotex was successful in part on its appeal.

Intellectual Property