Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2019 FC 1659 (Ulipristal*)
Proth. Furlanetto - 2019-12-23
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
This is a motion brought by the co-owner of the patent, The USA, for an Order allowing the USA leave to file a responding pleading to Apotex’ Statement of Defence. The underlying proceeding is an action brought under s. 6(1) of the Amended PM(NOC) Regulations in which Allergan Inc. (acting under the consent of the patent owners) seeks a declaration of infringement in respect of Canadian Patent No. 2,713,254 (the “254 Patent”). In response to the action, Apotex has filed a Statement of Defence asserting that the 254 Patent is invalid on a number of grounds. The USA was named as a party Defendant to the proceeding pursuant to s. 6(2) of the PM(NOC) Regulations. ... Its interest, as expressed at the motion, is solely to address the validity allegations made in Apotex’ Statement of Defence. ... In my view, the USA’s pleading should be identified as what it is: a Reply to the Statement of Defence. ... The role of the USA in the proceeding shall be limited to participating on the issues arising from the USA’s Reply, namely to responding to Apotex’ invalidity allegations and seeking to uphold the validity of the 254 Patent; and shall not be duplicative of the role of Allergan.
Decision relates to:
- T-1315-19 - ALLERGAN INC. v. APOTEX INC. ET AL.