The defendant and third party in a copyright infringement proceeding sought to bifurcate liability from remedies. The Court found that the action was “simply an action for copyright infringement” and therefore not particularly complicated even though it had an “unusual” claim for disgorgement of profits generated from a contract that was arguably facilitated by the alleged infringement.

The Respondent, JAMP, sought a direction on costs following an earlier decision (see 2022 FC 1209) finding that JAMP was not a “second person” under the PM(NOC) Regulations.

In UPL NA Inc v AgraCity Crop & Nutrition Ltd, UPL NA Inc., Arysta Lifescience North America, LLC and UPL Agrosolutions Canada Inc. are suing AgraCity Crop & Nutrition Ltd. and NewAgco Inc. for infringement of their patented herbicide for selective weed control in cereal crops.

The Defendants brought a motion seeking leave to file an expert report in reply (Rue Reply) in a patent action. The Defendants assert that the Rue Reply is proper and admissible reply evidence because it responds to a new and unexpected literature reference put forward in the Sinko Report tendered by the Plaintiffs.

This decision comes from an informal motion to strike the appeal brought to the Federal Court of Appeal, heard in writing without appearance of the parties.

In the context of a patent infringement action between competitors regarding a patent claiming a method and system for reducing the steps required to register a new wireless telephone user from a retail store, the plaintiff, Worthware, sought a “Norwich Order” under rule 238 of the Federal Courts Rules.

Serena Fashions Alberta Ltd (“Serena Alberta”) commenced an action against Serena Fashion Ltd (“Serena BC”) before the British Columbia Superior Court alleging trademark infringement of the BELLISSIMA registered marks, passing-off, depreciation of goodwill and breach of section 52 of the Competition Act (the “BCSC Action”).

This is a default judgment rendered in a passing-off case under section 7(b) of the Trademarks Act. In this case, the plaintiff, Sani Bleu inc. (“Sani Bleu”), which operates in the field of mobile portable toilets, seeks, among other things, to prevent the defendant, 9269-6806 Quebec inc. to market disinfectants and other sanitary products under the SaniBleu and SaniBlue trademarks.

Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”) commenced an action under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations against Janssen Inc., Janssen Oncology Inc. and BTG International Ltd. (collectively, “Janssen”) in relation to the drug abiraterone acetate.

The Plaintiffs are movie and television production companies who own the copyright in various works.