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: 11-20 of 1,286

Bifurcation of Infringement and Validity Issues in Section 8 Action
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • August 10 2016

This is a motion for bifurcation in an action brought pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations


Determining patentable subject matter in the United States and Canada
  • Bereskin & Parr LLP
  • Canada, USA
  • April 10 2012

As reported in our March 21, 2012, Spring Alert, the United States Supreme Court recently held in Prometheus v. Mayo that certain personalized medicine claims were directed to laws of nature and were thus unpatentable despite containing both an administering step and a determining step


Court declares Minister's decision restricting importation of drugs from two of Apotex's drug manufacturing facilities in India unlawful
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • August 24 2016

Apotex et al. Brought a judicial review (JR) of the Minister of Health's August 2015 decision that varied the terms and conditions of Apotex's Drug


Obviousness double patenting in Canada not so obvious
  • SIM. IP Practice
  • Canada
  • May 16 2016

The recent decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC v. Eli Lilly Canada Inc. et al.,2016 FCA 119 ("Mylan"), highlights


Supreme Court of Canada to hear appeal on patent utility
  • Smart & Biggar/Fetherstonhaugh
  • Canada
  • March 10 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has today granted AstraZeneca leave to appeal a Federal Court of Appeal decision, affirming a trial decision invalidating


Federal Court deviates from established tests for patent listing Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Canada (Health)
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • March 22 2016

In the decision summarized below, Apotex successfully obtained a dismissal of Gilead's application for a prohibition order in respect of Canadian


Claims under Section 8 of the NOC Regulations and under Ashby v. White struck in Ontario Court
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • August 24 2016

In the Ontario Court, Apotex claimed damages pursuant to, inter alia , section 8 of the NOC Regulations. Pfizer brought a motion to strike out parts


Expert opinion as to what “one would expect” is speculation, not evidence
  • Bereskin & Parr LLP
  • Canada
  • March 4 2015

In the latest of a trilogy of cases under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations relating to the drug tadalafil (CIALIS), Justice


Supreme Court dismisses appeal from the bench in Sanofi-Aventis v. Apotex, Inc.
  • Bereskin & Parr LLP
  • Canada
  • May 8 2015

On April 21st, 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed from the bench an appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal decision inApotex Inc. v


“Plain and obvious” that innovators’ profits are not available to generics in Ontario
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • September 26 2013

On September 12, 2013, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the Superior Court's dismissal of Apotex's claim for disgorgement of Takeda's and