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: Federal Court Finds HOSTESS Trademark Valid and Infringed in Summary Trial

  • August 19, 2021
  • David Bowden

This decision relates to an action commenced by Boulangerie Vachon Inc (“Vachon”) and its affiliates against Silvano Racioppo (the “Individual Defendant”) and companies for which he acts as principal, including Natural Stuff Inc. and Hostess Bread Company Inc. (collectively, the “Corporate Defendants”). In the action – which proceeded via summary trial in Federal Court – the Plaintiffs alleged infringement, passing off, and depreciation of goodwill in the HOSTESS trademark by the Defendants.

Intellectual Property

Case summary: Federal Court refuses to accept reply expert reports

  • August 19, 2021
  • David Chapman

This decision concerned a motion by the plaintiff (PSET) to file reply expert reports in an ongoing patent infringement action. PSET argued that these reply reports were necessitated by new evidence introduced by the defendants’ (Google) responding expert reports.

Intellectual Property

Case summary: FC awards upper column IV costs in patent infringement action

  • August 19, 2021
  • David Chapman

The plaintiff [dTechs] was unsuccessful in its patent infringement action against the defendants British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority [BC Hydro] and Awesense Wireless Inc [Awesense]. It was held that the defendants had not infringed dTechs patent either individually or together, and that the patent was in any case invalid for obviousness and anticipation. This decision addressed the costs and disbursements payable by dTechs to the defendants as a result of this finding.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Federal Court refuses application for judicial review

  • August 19, 2021
  • Rachel Hill

Merck Canada Inc (Merck) sought judicial review of the refusal by the Minister of Health (Minister) to add Canadian Patent No 2,830,806 (806 Patent) to the Patent Register pursuant to s 4(6) of the PM(NOC) Regulations. The Minister previously found that Merck’s patent lists were not submitted within the specified 30-day time period.

Intellectual Property

Case Summary: Mistaken omission of co-inventors corrected

  • August 19, 2021
  • Rachel Hill

The Applicant, CAE Inc. (“CAE”) seeks to add Marc-André Proulx (“Mr. Proulx”) and Dac Toan Ho (“Mr. Ho”) as co-inventors to Canadian Patent No. 3,000,463 (the “463 Patent”), due to an inadvertent error or mistake pursuant to section 52 of the Patent Act.

Intellectual Property