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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 184

Order of prohibition granted in respect of use patent

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 26 2015

The Court found that Mylan’s allegations of lack of utility, and specifically lack of sound prediction, and obviousness-type double patenting were

Minister’s decision to grant NOA to generic company set aside, as the generic did not comply with the NOC regulations

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 19 2015

In this proceeding, Pfizer sought to judicially review the Minister of Health’s decision to grant Teva a NOC for exemestane. A company called GMP

Court refused to grant protective order covering NOA

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 19 2015

In the context of a proceeding brought pursuant to the NOC Regulations, Mylan sought a confidentiality that would allow it to designate portions of

Court finds claims do not cover method of medical treatment, orders that they issue

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 19 2015

In this decision, AbbVie brought a judicial review of a decision of the Commissioner of Patents refusing to issue its patent. The issue was whether

S. 8 case not struck, despite prohibition order having issued in underlying s. 6 proceeding

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • December 4 2014

In this case, the Prothonotary refused to strike a Statement of Claim brought pursuant to s. 8 of the NOC Regulations, and this decision was upheld

Leave to appeal to SCC granted for a section 8 damages case

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • November 3 2014

The Supreme Court has granted leave in a proceeding pursuant to section 8 of the PM(NOC) Regulations. Some of the issues to be decided in this

Pleadings amendment to a damages reference not allowed found to be a collateral attack on the final judgment

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • November 3 2014

Apotex moved to file an amended Responding Statement of Issues on a reference pursuant to Rule 153. According to the Court, Apotex wants to argue

Patent not eligible for listing: patent claiming one medicinal ingredient,but directed to a fixed-dose combination of medicines

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • October 15 2014

This was an appeal from two decisions for three proceedings before Prothonotary Milczynski, in which she determined that a patent could not be listed

Causes of action found against Pfizer for a BC class-action certification based on the VIAGRA patent

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • August 14 2014

Pfizer had a Canadian patent for VIAGRA that was found to not comply with the disclosure requirement by the Supreme Court in an earlier PM(NOC

FCA refuses to stay injunction order

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • July 10 2014

Janssen and Abbvie were involved in a patent infringement action. Abbvie was successful in its claim for infringement, and the patent was held to be