Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC v. Google Canada Corporation, 2021 FC 587

Justice McDonald - 2021-06-10

Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:

Google argues that the reply reports were necessitated by new evidence contained in the Plaintiff’s, Paid Search Engine Tools, LLC (PSET), responding expert reports on construction. Google argues that it is entitled to respond to new evidence and that fairness requires that it be permitted to file the reply reports. ... The claim that the Second Haruvy Report contains “new evidence” seems to arise from the fact that Dr. Haruvy’s first report only addressed the issue of monetary remedy. The first Stricchiola report provided opinion on construction and infringement of the 167 Patent. Both Dr. Haruvy’s and Ms. Stricchiola’s second reports responded to Dr. Parkes’s first report on construction and validity of the 167 Patent. Dr. Haruvy was therefore providing a response to Dr. Parkes’s evidence on validity without having previously provided his opinion on construction. ... In determining if the Court should exercise its discretion, I have concluded that the proposed reply reports do not contain “new” evidence and therefore do not assist the Court in its task of making a determination on the merits. I am also of the view that the subject matter addressed in the reply reports has already been offered in earlier reports, or could have been anticipated at an earlier date. In the circumstances, I agree that PSET would suffer prejudice if the reports were allowed at this late stage in the proceedings.

Decision relates to:

  • A-172-21 - which is an appeal from this decision


Canadian Intellectual Property