In the context of a patent infringement action, the Plaintiffs brought a motion to amend the Second Amended Statement of Claim to add additional vendors as contributors to the alleged infringement and to add additional systems as components of alleged infringing systems. This motion was brought after several days of examinations for discovery took place and motions to compel have been adjudicated.

In the context of a patent infringement action, the Plaintiffs brought a motion to amend the reply and defence to counterclaim.

In the context of a patent infringement action, the Plaintiffs brought a motion to compel the Defendants to provide a further and better Affidavits of Documents and to produce all relevant Documents in their possession, power or control, or (ii) in the alternative, to be entitled to cross-examine each of the Defendants on the creation of their Affidavits of Documents.

In this matter, a party (Canadian Energy Services L.P. – referred to in the decision as “CES”) applied for a judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner of Patents to vary the ownership and inventorship records of a Canadian patent. By way of brief background, CES had formally been listed as the owner of a patent with a specific individual listed as the inventor of the claim subject matter.

In this case, Justice Fuhrer heard and dismissed an appeal of the Order of Associate Judge Coughlan that had dismissed an application to file additional evidence in a trademark expungement proceeding.

This is an appeal to the Federal Court by F.I.A.L. Finanziaria Industrie Alto Lario S.P.A (the “Applicant”) of a decision by the Trademark Opposition Board in an opposition proceeding where Galperti SRL (the “Respondent”) opposed the Applicant’s GALPERTI trademark (the “Trademark”).

This is an appeal to the Federal Court of a decision by the Trademark Opposition Board (the “Board”) in a non-use cancellation proceeding pursuant to Section 45 of the Trademarks Act. Red Maple Manufacturing Inc. (the “Applicant”) was ordered to delete part of the goods from its registration for a design mark with Registration No. TMA963,031 (the “Trademark”).

In the context of a patent infringement proceeding, the parties brought discovery motions. The plaintiff sought to strike portions of the statement of defence because the defendant failed to comply with its discovery obligations to produce relevant documents.

Isaac Bennet Sales Agencies brought a section 56 appeal of the Registrar of Trademarks’ decision to expunge its trademark registration for MINT under section 45 for failure to provide evidence of use. The Federal Court allowed the appeal, maintaining the registration for specific goods based on new evidence showing use of the mark during the relevant period.

In this decision, the Federal Court dismissed two motions brought by the Defendants: the first in which the Defendants sought to appeal a case management Judge’s Order striking the Defendants’ counterclaim for damage reputation, interference with the peaceful enjoyment of property, and moral prejudice under Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms for want of jurisdiction; the second seeking a motion to stay case management judge’s Order pending an appeal.