Patents
Nova Chemicals Corporation v The Dow Chemical Co: The law of patent remedies takes a step forward
Introduction In Nova Chemicals Corporation v The Dow Chemical Company et al., 2022 SCC 43 (“Nova Chemicals”) the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) clarified the test for determining a proper accounting of profits when it is relied upon as a statutory remedy for patent infringement. In the process of doing so, the SCC finally admitted […]
AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v Apotex Inc.: The Supreme Court Overturns the Promise Doctrine
Patents exist to reward inventors and to facilitate the fulsome disclosure of inventions to the public’s benefit. However, prospective patents must meet statutory requirements in order to be approved. As per the Patent Act, RSC, 1985, c P-4 [Patent Act], prospective inventions must demonstrate that they are “useful” in order to enjoy protection under the Act. Unquestionably, […]
Teva v Pfizer: How Viagra Allowed the SCC to Stiffen Patent Disclosure Requirements
Canadian patent law has undergone a number of significant developments throughout the past year, with numerous issues capturing the attention of the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC"). In particular, the issue of disclosure has undergone a great deal of juridical scrutiny. Disclosure constitutes a fundamental tenet of patent law aimed at striking a balance between […]
Appeal Watch: Hart, Three s. 8 PM(NOC) Cases and Thamby Denied Leave to Appeal
The Court Won’t Hear Court versus Church Earlier this week, the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") refused to hear the case of Hart v. Roman Catholic Episcopal Corporation of the Diocese of Kingston, in Canada 2011 ONCA 728 [Hart]. While the church and the issue may be different, this case can be placed alongside Bentley v. […]
Hidden Agendas? Teva v Pfizer
In May of 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada granted Teva Canada leave to appeal the Federal Court of Appeal’s decision, Teva v Pfizer, 2010 FCA 242. At issue is Patent ‘446 (July 2008; expires in 2014), which covers Pfizer’s sildenafil-based drug for treating erectile dysfunction (ED). Pfizer originally patented sildenafil in 1998 to treat […]
Amazon’s “One-Click” Patent Granted in Canada: A Case Comment on the Federal Court of Appeal Decision
The patentability of business methods has been a major source of controversy in Canadian patent law. While the Federal Court of Appeal ("FCA") had the opportunity to clarify the patentability of business methods in Canada (Attorney General) v Amazon.com, Inc, 2011 FCA 328, it left many questions unanswered, only affirming that business methods were not […]
A “One-Click” Patent: Canada (Finally) Opens-Up Possibility for Business Method Patents in Amazon.com, Inc v Attorney General
In a previous post on the US Supreme Court decision, Bilski et al v Kappos, No.08-964 545 F. 3d 943 [Bilski], I discussed how SCOTUS alluded to the possibility that “business methods” could be patented in the United States – a case that did not outline precisely what kinds of business methods entailed protection. Canadian courts, by […]
U.S. Supreme Court in Bilski et al. v. Kappos tap floodgates for "business methods patents"
On June 28, 2010, the US Supreme Court released its reasons in Bilski et al. v. Kappos, No.08-964 545 F. 3d 943 (PDF link) (“Bilski”). The case was widely followed, in particular, by intellectual property firms, as a decision widely favouring business method patents could have had serious ramifications on the patenting practices of future […]
Modern-Day David and Goliath Battle Could Head to U.S. Supreme Court: i4i v. Microsoft
Technology giant Microsoft Corp. has made one last-ditch effort to defend a decade-long patent infringement lawsuit against a small Canadian software company, i4i Inc. Last week, Microsoft filed a petition (PDF link) with the US Supreme Court asking for a final resolution to the dispute. In the suit, i4i alleges that Microsoft used the small […]