Farmobile, LLC v. Farmers Edge Inc., 2020 FC 688
Proth. Ring - 0000-00-00
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
On May 8, 2020, the Defendant/Plaintiff by Counterclaim, Farmers Edge submitted a notice of motion for summary judgment to the Court dismissing the patent infringement action brought by the Plaintiff/Defendant by Counterclaim, Farmobile. Farmers Edge also requested a case management conference to set a schedule for the motion. The notice of motion was referred to the Court for directions as to filing pursuant to Rule 72 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 [Rules], because it potentially did not comply with Rule 213(1). Rule 213(1) requires a party bringing a motion for summary judgment to do so any time “before the time and place for trial have been fixed” [hereinafter, the “Timing Condition”]. ... The issues to be determined on this motion are: (a) Is the Timing Condition engaged? (b) If the Timing Condition is engaged, should the Court allow the summary judgment motion to proceed under Rule 55? For the reasons that follow, I find that Farmers Edge’s motion should not be permitted to proceed.
Decision relates to:
- T-449-17 - FARMOBILE, LLC. v. FARMERS EDGE INC.