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 322

Prohibition granted re the compound patent; dismissed re use and polymorph patents
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 30 2014

This NOC proceeding deals with challenges to three patents, a compound patent, a use patent and a polymorph patent


Court dismisses NOC proceeding for mootness when NOA withdrawn
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • January 30 2013

Lilly brought an application for prohibition pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. Subsequently, Teva established to


Product specificity is the same for different types of claims in listing on the Patent Register
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 30 2014

Teva brought a motion pursuant to section 6(5)(a) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations relating to the listing of a patent on


Court bifurcates determination of Start Date for section 8 action
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • May 30 2014

This is an action commenced pursuant to section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. Pfizer counterclaimed against Apotex


Court of Appeal upholds decision awarding Section 8 compensation where sales related to “unauthorized indications” Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada limited, 2014 FCA 69
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • March 24 2014

Drug: ramipril This was an appeal by Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. and Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH (collectively "Sanofi") from a judgment of the


Teva's allegation for section 8 damages not struck on appeal
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • October 28 2013

Pfizer appealed a decision refusing to strike Teva’s Statement of Claim to the Federal Court, but the appeal was dismissed because a de novo review


Order of prohibition granted in respect of one of two asserted patents
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • October 28 2013

Two patents were under consideration by the Court in this application brought pursuant to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations


Motion for reconsideration denied
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • September 30 2013

Sanofi-Aventis had previously been successful in its appeal of a patent infringement decision. Sanofi-Aventis brought the within motion to vary the


Two electrical swtichgear patents are found to be obvious
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • September 30 2013

Both of ABB Technology’s patents have been found invalid in an action for infringement. These patents relate to gas insulated switchgear assemblies


Intellectual property weekly abstracts bulletin
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • June 10 2013

In November, the Supreme Court issued its decision in the sildenafil case, and, as part of its order, found the patent to be invalid. As this case was