follow up

While we wait for the judgment from the Federal Court of Appeal in the proceeding on the patentability of business methods, I thought I would post a few remaining items from the case.

I had previously posted copies of the Appellant’s Factum and the Respondent’s Factum. Copies of the Intervener’s Factum and the Respondent’s Reply to the Intervener are now also available.

There are a few reports from the hearing including from Nora Sleeth at Osgoode Hall Law School and Chris Heer of Bennett Jones.


I was away last week on vacation and unfortunately my computer failed while I was away. It is up and running now and today’s email should include all the updates for the past week. Sorry for the interruption!

Interlocutory injunction denied in Esomeprazole-Apotex

In a decision published yesterday, Justice Crampton of the Federal Court denied Astrazeneca’s request for an interlocutory injunction against Apotex. The decision is Astrazeneca Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2011 FC 505 (Esomeprazole) in T-1668-10 and follows a PM(NOC) proceeding in which Apotex’s allegations of invalidity against at least some of the patents were found justified (T-371-08). The decision has already been appealed and the appeal dismissed by the Federal Court of Appeal (A-180-11).

Professor Norman Siebrasse of University of New Brunswick and author of the Sufficient Description blog, has an interesting discussion of the test for an interlocutory injunction in the context of this decision.

Particulars needed for pleading patent infringement

In a decision published today, the Federal Court of Appeal upheld a lower court decision striking the plaintiff’s further amended statement of claim on the basis that it did not provide sufficient details of the defendant’s activity that would constitute infringement. The Court upheld the view that the allegations were not on any knowledge or evidence of the plaintiff of the defendant’s activities and the plaintiff hoped to fill in the gaps in its knowledge through discovery. Continue reading Particulars needed for pleading patent infringement

Canadian Intellectual Property