Articles

CBA Members

Intellectual
Property

CBA Intellectual Property Section

Articles are published by the Intellectual Property Section. Members interested in posting articles are encouraged to send them to the Section by email: CBAI_P@cba.org.

Today
Today

Case summary: Filing of reply expert evidence

  • February 25, 2021
  • Ken Clark and Lawrence Veregin

This decision concerns a motion by the Plaintiffs to seek leave to file reply expert reports from its expert witnesses in a patent impeachment action. The reply expert reports include the experts’ responses to new issues and a rebuttal to the Defendant’s expert’s claim construction based on correspondence with the patent office during prosecution of the patent (s. 53.1(1) of the Patent Act).

Intellectual Property

Case summary: Lump sum costs for copyright infringement proceeding

  • February 25, 2021
  • Alan Macek

After a finding that the defendant had infringed the copyright in hundreds of photographs and other materials by reproducing them on several websites by way of summary judgment (see 2019 FC 1524) and an order awarding over $350,000 in statutory damages (see 2020 FC 794), the Court considered the appropriate costs award.

Intellectual Property

RAPAFLO formulation patent inventive, but not infringed; partial settlement of invalidity counterclaim was not effective

  • February 25, 2021
  • Will Boyer

In this decision under the PM(NOC) Regulations, Justice Crampton considered three separate issues and found that (1) Allergan’s formulation patent for RAPAFLO was not infringed by Sandoz’s proposed generic product; (2) file wrapper estoppel does not apply to an exclusive licensee; and (3) the formulation patent was not invalid for obviousness.

Intellectual Property

Case summary: Federal Court reinstates trademark following negotiations

  • February 25, 2021
  • Sam Campbell

In this decision, Érablière Escuminac Inc. appealed a decision of the Registrar of Trademarks [the “Registrar”] striking the mark “Escuminac & Design” [the “Mark”] from the Trademark Registry on the basis that Érablière Escuminac failed to produce evidence of use of the Mark.

Intellectual Property