The Federal Court issued a practice notice on trial management conferences and procedures. The guidelines identify issues to be determined at pre-trial conferences and trial management conferences as well as impose new deadlines for pre-trial steps.
Tag Archives: Litigation
Summary Judgment and Summary Trial
My recent article on the 2009 amendments to the Federal Courts Rules relating to summary judgment and summary trial, particular for intellectual property proceedings was published by Slaw.
Double patenting arose to deal with ‘evergreening’ of patent rights. I discuss the application of double patenting with ‘New Act’ patents in my latest column for Slaw.
Continue reading Double Patenting
Industry Canada has indicated that changes will be made to the Patented Medicine (Notice of Compliance) Regulations relating to the listing of patents on the Patent Register claiming single medicinal ingredients found in combination drugs.
ABB Technology v. Hyundai Heavy Industries
Justice Barnes released the trial decision in ABB Technology AG et al. v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., 2013 FC 947, a patent infringement action relating to medium voltage gas-insulated switchgear. The two patents at issue were held to be obvious after contentious claim construction. Continue reading ABB Technology v. Hyundai Heavy Industries
Top Cited Decisions for 2012
Trademark confusion, damages proceedings under the PM(NOC) Regulations and inventive concept were the big issues for 2012 based on an analysis of the reported intellectual property decisions from the Federal Court and Federal Court of the Appeal during the past year. The Supreme Court’s 2006 Mattel decision was the most frequently cited decision.
Foreign Enforcement of IP and Ontario
Earlier this month, the Ontario Superior Court issued a couple of judgments relating to foreign IP proceedings with Ontario parties. In Blizzard v. Simpson, 2012 ONSC 4312, foreign copyright damages and an injunction were enforced. In Agemian v. Pactiv LLC, 2012 ONSC 4571, an “anti-suit” injunction was rejected, allowing an Illinois action relating to a North American patent settlement to proceed.
Judge Posner Smartphone Litigation
On Friday, Judge Posner, sitting as a trial judge, dismissed with prejudice patent infringement litigation between Apple and Motorola on the basis that no damages could be proven by either side. Judge Posner stated that proof of infringement alone was not enough to warrant a remedial order, such as damages, an injunction or a declaration.
Justice Catherine M. Kane has been appointed a judge of the Federal Court effective immediately replacing Justice Simpson who elected to become a supernumerary judge. Justice Kane was a lawyer with the Department of Justice Canada in Ottawa practicing in the area of criminal law.
Brimonidine – Issues of Comity
Justice Hughes issued a decision in Allergen v. Apotex 2012 FC 767 (Brimonidine) earlier this week. He determined that Apotex’s allegation of obviousness was justified but granted the prohibition order on the basis that an earlier decision of Justice Crampton on the same patents, but different parties (2011 FC 1316) was contrary and therefore an issue of comity should be considered by the Federal Court of Appeal. The decision and a summary is available from Beeser Ramamoorthy.