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 483

Motion for particulars in action under section 8 denied as not necessary

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 1 2015

Pfizer brought a motion in an action brought pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines(Notice of Compliance) Regulations seeking to strike

Pharma in brief - no induced infringement: patent struck from application under s. 6(5)(b) of the PM(NOC) Regulations

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 16 2015

Prothonotary Lafrenière issued an order pursuant to section 6(5)(b) of the PM(NOC) Regulations striking all allegations relating to one of

Motion for reply evidence granted in part

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • April 1 2015

This is an appeal from the decision of a Prothonotary, denying leave to file reply evidence in a proceeding pursuant to the Patented Medicines

Canada PM(NOC) decision: Federal Court judge criticizes “very sketchy” disclosure in a CIALIS patent

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 30 2015

On February 2, 2015 Justice de Montigny of the Federal Court released his judgment and reasons in Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC

Federal Court declares omeprazole formulation patent valid and infringed

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 25 2015

On March 16, 2015, Justice Barnes of the Federal Court issued his decision in AstraZeneca Canada Inc. et al v. Apotex Inc., 2015 FC 322, declaring

IP monitor - a healthy development? A review of CIPO’s new “medical method” examination guidelines

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 31 2015

On March 18, 2015 the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (“CIPO”) issued a Patent Notice: Revised Examination Practice Respecting Medical Uses

Federal Court upholds validity of patent for escitalopram (CIPRALEX)

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 19 2013

Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”) brought an action for impeachment seeking a declaration that Lundbeck’s Canadian Patent No. 1,339,452 (the “’452 Patent”) is

Patents found obvious; subsequent appeal moot

  • Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 6 2015

Janssen Inc (Janssen) brought two Applications pursuant to section 6 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations for orders

Claims that involve a fixed dosage and schedule can constitute patentable subject matter

  • Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • March 26 2015

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) has just issued a revised guidance for the examination of patent applications featuring medical use

Methods of medical treatment and dosage claims

  • Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • June 28 2011

In Canada, claims to methods of medical treatment are considered to fall outside the definition of invention according to section 2 of the Patent Act and a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada