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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 439

When removing a named inventor, evidence that the remaining individuals are the sole inventors is not necessary
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 25 2016

Qualcomm sought to remove a named inventor who was added to a patent through inadvertence or mistake. The named inventor provided affidavit evidence


A finding of a settlement agreement is overturned because counsel did not have the authority to bind his client
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 25 2016

The Federal Court of Appeal has overturned the earlier finding that Allergan and Apotex had settled their patent infringement litigation (2015 FC


Sending correspondence by XpresspostTM to the Commissioner of Patents is found to be effected on the date of delivery, not on the date of receipt
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 18 2016

The Federal Court has held that the use of XpresspostTM service of Canada Post is considered to be delivery to a designated establishment within rule


The Federal Court of Appeal determines the incorrect date to assess obviousness-type double patenting, but leaves the determination of the correct date for another day
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 28 2016

The Federal Court of Appeal has upheld an earlier decision (2015 FC 17) prohibiting Mylan from obtaining its Notice of Compliance until after the


Quia timet claim not struck from patent infringement suit
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 20 2016

We previously reported on the appeal of a refusal to strike out a statement of claim, which was dismissed, during the week of April 4, 2016. In the


Supreme Court Leaves to Appeal
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

The Supreme Court has dismissed Pfizer's leave to appeal in Pfizer Canada Inc., et al. v. Teva Canada Limited (36772). The Supreme Court has provided


Patent held to not be infringed based on the construction of the claims
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

Apotex sent a NOA to Shire alleging its patent was invalid and will not be infringed by Apotex. The issues were narrowed for the hearing, where


Motion for Interim Injunction Dismissed for Failing to Establish Irreparable Harm
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

TearLab brought a motion for an interim injunction, with the hearing for an interlocutory injunction being scheduled in late April or May. TearLab is


Witness' Evidence Given Less Weight because not Blinded to Patent or Issues; NOC Proceeding Dismissed
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

Apotex sent a NOA in respect of a single patent, alleging obviousness and lack of utility. The Court held that allegation was justified. In


Motion to Strike and for Particulars Denied; Elevated Costs Ordered for Breach of Settlement Privilege
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • April 14 2016

Umano brought a motion to strike portions of the Statement of Claim, and in the alternative for further and better particulars. The motion further