Justice St-Louis - 2020-09-10
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
The reasons relating to the Plaintiffs’ actions and related counterclaims, in regards to the 684 Patent are exposed in case docket T-1627-16 and will be placed on this file (Eli Lilly Canada Inc. and als. v Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC, 2020 FC 816). Hence, these additional reasons are concerned with the validity and infringement, at the liability phase, of the 540 Patent, entitled “Modified Pictet-Spengler Reaction and Products Prepared Therefrom”. ... Although the actions regarding the two patents at issue have not been bifurcated, the parties all agreed to the trial being divided in two separate components, the first pertaining to the liability phase of the 684 Patent, which involves all four Defendants, and the other pertaining to the liability phase of the 540 Patent, which involves only Apotex as the Defendant. ... The drug substance at the heart of these proceedings is tadalafil ... As per the reasons above, I find Claims 1, 3–4 are invalid for anticipation and all of the asserted Claims are invalid for obviousness.
Decision relates to:
- T-1627-16 - ELI LILLY CANADA INC. ET AL. v. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS ULC
- T-1632-16 - ELI LILLY CANADA INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY ET AL. v. APOTEX INC.
- A-239-20 - which is an appeal from this decision