Yesterday, Jeremy Barretto canvassed the Supreme Court of Canada’s ("SCC") most recent decision in Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc, [2008] 3 SCR 265 [Apotex] concerning selection patents. Since Jeremy already surveyed the facts, procedural history, and analyses of the case, I will focus today on the issue of obviousness, noting some distinctions between the obviousness standard set out […]
On Thursday November 6, 2008 the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") released its decision in Apotex Inc v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc, [2008] 3 SCR 265. This intellectual property case involves a dispute over selection patents between Apotex Inc. ("Apotex"), a generic drug manufacturer, and Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc ("Sanofi") who held the original patent. TheCourt published […]
In Harvard College v Canada (Commissioner of Patents), [2002] 4 SCR 45 [Harvard College], the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC"), in a 5-4 decision, ruled that a genetically modified mouse was not a patentable invention under the Patent Act, RSC 1985, c P-4. Harvard College had created a genetically modified mouse, known as the “oncomouse,” that […]
On Thursday, July 5, 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") granted the application for leave to appeal in the case of Apotex Inc. v Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc., 2006 FCA 421, an appeal from the Federal Court of Appeal. This intellectual property law case deals with the requirements for patent protection.