T-Rex Property AB v. Pattison Outdoor Advertising Limited Partnership, 2019 FC 1004
Justice Manson - 2019-07-26
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
This is an appeal from the Order of Prothonotary Steele [the Case Management Judge] which, among other things, granted a bifurcation order, a protective order, and a confidentiality order. ... The complexity of this proceeding is evident from the pleadings, which the Case Management Judge referred to, including an expired patent with 30 claims, all of which are alleged to be invalid for basically all possible attacks on validity, four Defendants each accused of infringing 24 claims through the use of three different digital advertising systems, and a plaintiff who is a non-practicing entity and has deferred election between its damages or Pattison’s profits. Moreover, the question of whether a non-practicing entity is entitled to elect between damages or profits appears to be a novel legal issue which adds to the proceeding’s complexity. Finally, there was evidence in the Otto Affidavit that the determination of revenues derived from the alleged infringement would be a complex process.
Decision relates to:
- T-1066-17 - TREX PROPERTY AB v. PATTISON OUTDOOR ADVERTISING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ET AL