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 333

US Supreme Court releases Myriad, isolated DNA unpatentable what it means for Canada

  • Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
  • -
  • Canada, USA
  • -
  • June 13 2013

The Supreme Court of the United States today issued its opinion in Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. et al., 569 U

After reconsideration, the Viagra patent is not void

  • Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 11 2013

Close to seven months after rendering its decision in Teva Canada Ltd v Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 SCC 60, the Supreme Court of Canada varied its

Supreme Court amends earlier decision: Viagra patent not void

  • Bereskin & Parr LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 6 2013

In Teva Canada Ltd v Pfizer Canada Inc, the Supreme Court of Canada (the "SCC") held Pfizer's Canadian Patent No. 2,163,446 (the '446 Patent) to be

Supreme Court varies VIAGRA ruling, confirms that patent is neither invalid nor void

  • Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 6 2013

The Supreme Court of Canada has clarified its ruling in Teva Canada Ltd v Pfizer Canada Inc, 2012 SCC 60. The Court has confirmed that the patent in

PM(NOC) proceedings: Cobalt defeats Bayer’s Canadian patent on oral contraceptive YASMIN

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 31 2013

On May 29, 2013 Justice O'Reilly of the Federal Court dismissed Bayer PM Notice of Compliance (NOC) proceeding against Cobalt. The issue before the

Apotex successful in establishing section 8 damages liability of Pfizer regarding azithromycin

  • Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 28 2013

In very general terms, section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations ("Regulations") provides for liability of an innovator

Pfizer liable to Apotex for section 8 damages: amount to be determined

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 28 2013

In a judgment pronounced on May 10, 2013, Justice O'Reilly of the Federal Court of Canada (FC) granted Apotex's claim against Pfizer for section 8

Costs awarded on substantial indemnity basis for summary judgment motion

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 28 2013

Abbott and Takeda had previously been successful in a motion for partial summary judgment dismissing Apotex’ claims for disgorgment of profits based

Claim for section 8 damages allowed

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 28 2013

In this case, Apotex claimed damages pursuant to s. 8 of the NOC Regulations, and Pfizer alleged that Apotex should not be entitled to damages, due to

Supreme Court declines to hear Eli Lilly’s “promise of the patent” appeal

  • Bereskin & Parr LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • May 16 2013

The Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal today from the Federal Court of Appeal ("FCA") decision in Eli Lilly Canada Inc v Novopharm Ltd

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy