Tag archives: Federal Court of Appeal

Federal Court of Appeal rejects elevated standard of proof for induced infringement in paliperidone case

Photo of Fortunat Nadima NadimaPhoto of Christopher A. GuerreiroPhoto of Kristin WallBy Fortunat Nadima Nadima, Christopher A. Guerreiro and Kristin Wall on Posted in Intellectual property, Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) has allowed an appeal concerning induced infringement in an action under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (Regulations). The FCA found that the Federal Court (FC) had erred by applying an elevated causation requirement. The FCA also rejected an appeal by the generic from the finding that the patent was … Continue reading

Higher costs awards coming to the Federal Court, including for pharma regulatory and IP disputes

Photo of Chelsea NimmoPhoto of Paul JorgensenPhoto of Kristin WallBy Chelsea Nimmo, Paul Jorgensen and Kristin Wall on Posted in Damages, Intellectual property, Life sciences and healthcare, Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
Higher costs awards for Federal Court litigation are on the horizon, with the Canadian government consulting on proposed amendments to the costs structure in the Federal Courts Rules (the Rules). The proposed amendments are intended to increase costs awards by approximately 25%.   The current costs regime Under the Rules, the Federal Courts can fix a … Continue reading

FCA upholds selection patent protecting apixaban and rejects that a second patented invention was obvious to try

Photo of Pardeep HeirPhoto of Christopher A. GuerreiroPhoto of Kristin WallBy Pardeep Heir, Christopher A. Guerreiro and Kristin Wall on Posted in Intellectual property, Life sciences and healthcare, Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) has dismissed an appeal concerning four actions related to the molecule apixaban under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (Regulations). The Federal Court (FC) found the patents at issue to be valid. Background Bristol-Myers Squibb Canada Co. (BMS) markets ELIQUIS® (apixaban) in Canada for the treatment of thrombosis. … Continue reading

Federal Court of Appeal Restores Suspension Period

Photo of Allyson Whyte NowakPhoto of Kristin WallPhoto of Brian R. DaleyBy Allyson Whyte Nowak, Kristin Wall and Brian R. Daley on Posted in Uncategorized
On April 21, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) announced that it will restore the Suspension Period by default for all new matters and begin reinstating the Suspension Period on existing matters by removing them from its Selected Files List. Selected Files As previously reported in June 2020 (June 2020 Update), the FCA began … Continue reading

Federal Courts update guidance on COVID-19

Photo of Allyson Whyte NowakPhoto of Judith RobinsonPhoto of Brian R. DaleyBy Allyson Whyte Nowak, Judith Robinson and Brian R. Daley on Posted in Uncategorized
The Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) provided updated guidance for resuming hearings starting September 1, 2020 and clarified the effect of the federal Time Limits and Other Periods Act (COVID-19) on timelines for commencing and conducting litigation in the FCA. Both the FCA and the Federal Court confirmed that all Practice Directions, judgments, orders and … Continue reading

Federal Courts begin to phase out the Suspension Period

Photo of Allyson Whyte NowakPhoto of Judith RobinsonPhoto of Brian R. DaleyBy Allyson Whyte Nowak, Judith Robinson and Brian R. Daley on Posted in Uncategorized
On June 11, 2020 the Federal Court (FC) and Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) published updated notices to gradually phase out the Suspension Period, which had previously been extended to June 15, 2020. Federal Court The FC’s June 11, 2020 Practice Direction and Order (Updated Order), amends its previous Practice Directions, which, subject to the … Continue reading

Federal Court of Appeal revisits obviousness: guidance provided on “inventive concept” and “obvious to try” test

Photo of Judith RobinsonPhoto of Christopher A. GuerreiroBy Judith Robinson and Christopher A. Guerreiro on Posted in Intellectual property, Life sciences and healthcare, Pharmaceuticals and life sciences
Case: Bristol-Myers Squibb Canada Co v Teva Canada Limited, 2017 FCA 76 (A-191-16), aff’g (for different reasons) 2016 FC 580 (Court File No. T-1364-14) Drug: REYATAZ® (atazanavir bisulfate) Nature of case: Appeal from application for prohibition order granted pursuant to section 6 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133 (the Regulations) Successful party: … Continue reading
LexBlog