Bombardier Recreational Products Inc. v. Arctic Cat Inc. and Arctic Cat Sales Inc., 2017 FC 207
Justice Roy - 2017-02-24
Read full decision. Summary prepared by Alan Macek:
BRP alleged infringement of 49 claims across four patents relating to snowmobile design in a 40-day patent trial. The Court construed key claim terms across the four patents. On infringement, the court found that the Arctic Cat snowmobiles did not have an 'engine cradle' as that term is used in the claims of one patent. On the three rider forward patents, the Court found that measurements using a biomechanically neutral anthropomorphic test device showed all the 378 models of AC snowmobiles fell within the scope of at least some of the claims but the Court found the rider position patents invalid for failing to have an adequate disclosure: "In this case, the weight of the evidence favours clearly the proposition that the disclosure does not tell the skilled person how to reconfigure the snowmobile [and] what even that reconfiguration may be." The Court also considered but dismissed allegations of invalidity on the basis of anticipation, including a finding of experimental public use, obviousness, and false and misleading statements. The Court also considered challenges to admissibility and weight of various portions of expert reports and experimental testing. Since no claims were both valid and infringed, the action was dismissed with costs. (Lawyers at DLA Piper (Canada) LLP acted for the successful defendants)
Decision relates to:
- T-2025-11 - BOMBARDIER RECREATIONAL PRODUCTS INC. v. ARCTIC CAT, INC.
- A-109-17 - which is an appeal from this decision