We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 47

Buyer beware: IP is not just another asset

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • December 16 2011

There is no doubt that trade-marks, brands, and other trade indicia and intellectual property (“IP”) can be one of a company’s most valuable assets

Federal Court finds patent obvious and not soundly predicted

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 7 2010

On June 30, 2010, the Federal Court dismissed AstraZeneca's application for an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of Compliance to Apotex in respect of its generic version of esomeprazole (NEXIUM) until after the expiry of Canadian Patent No. 2,139,653 ("653 Patent"

Canadian businesses beware: blessing of business patents in US will affect you

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada, USA
  • -
  • July 5 2010

Computer and other business-related inventions are not per se unpatentable

Federal Court of Appeal holds that patent dedication to be assessed as of date of hearing, not earlier

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 30 2010

On June 22, 2010, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) granted Abbott’s cross-appeal and dismissed Sandoz’s appeal stemming from a decision of the Federal Court

Quebec court discusses rights and obligations regarding employee inventions

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 23 2010

Three times in the last few months we have produced newsletters concerning recent court decisions discussing the rights and obligations of a university in an invention made by a member of its academic staff

Trade-marks: Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc.

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 17 2010

It is rare for trade-mark issues in Canada to attract the attention of the Supreme Court of Canada

Federal Court holds PM(NOC) findings not necessarily irrelevant in subsequent patent actions VIAGRA (sildenafil citrate)

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 16 2010

On June 11, 2010, Prothonotary Aalto of the Federal Court dismissed a motion by Apotex seeking to strike allegations of res judicata, issue estoppel, collateral estoppel, comity and abuse of process (the “Abuse Allegations”) from Pfizer’s Statement of Defence in an impeachment action

Federal Court of Appeal: section 8 damages do not arise if a prohibition order is set aside after an impeachment action NAPROXYN SR (NAPROXEN

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 15 2010

On June 10, 2010, the Federal Court of Appeal (“FCA”) dismissed Apotex Inc.’s (“Apotex”) appeal from the decision of Hughes J, who had dismissed Apotex’s damages action under section 8 of the NOC Regulations in respect of the drug NAPROXYN SR

Federal Court upholds XALATAN patent and grants prohibition order to Pfizer XALATAN (latanoprost)

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 4 2010

On April 26, 2010, the Federal Court granted Pfizer Canada Inc. and Pharmacia Aktieblolag’s (“Pfizer et al”) application for an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a notice of compliance to Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”) in respect of a generic version of latanoprost, the active ingredient in XALATAN until the expiry of Canadian Patent No. 1,339,132 (“132 patent”

Federal court holds that notice of allegation is not a confidential document

  • Norton Rose Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 4 2010

On April 14, 2010, Prothonotary Milczynski of the Federal Court dismissed a motion by Novopharm Limited (“Novopharm”) for an Order designating its notice of allegation (“NOA”) as “confidential information” under the terms of a Protective Order