The Federal Court of Appeal upheld Seedlings Life Science Ventures v Pfizer Canada, 2020 FC 1, that found patent claims of an apparatus and method for rapid autoinjection (the ‘935 Patent) invalid for overbreadth, certain claims invalid for anticipation and obviousness, and not infringed (¶4, 6), and set aside the Federal Court’s conclusion that claims for an accounting of profits would be disallowed from licensees (¶77-81).

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of a Federal Court judgment (Seedlings Life Science Ventures v Pfizer, 2019 FC 1396 (FC Reasons)), that admitted into evidence certain documents produced as business records related to remedies during examination for discovery of a witness in a patent infringement trial because it determined the issue was moot (FCA Reasons, ¶1,6).

DeepRoot brought patent infringement action alleging that GreenBlue’s “RootSpace” product infringes various claims of their Patents number 2,552,348 (348 Patent) and number 2,829,599 (599 Patent). The Patents related to a subsurface structural cell system that supports the hardscape (e.g. sidewalk), enables stormwater retention and filtration as well as allowing tree roots to grow in uncompacted soil.

In the underlying simplified action, Blacklock claimed that Parks Canada had copied, distributed and accessed articles contrary to the Copyright Act. The action was one of 13 actions brought against various governmental departments, but the remaining 12 actions were on hold pending the outcome of the Parks Canada dispute.

In this decision, the Federal Court considered an appeal of a simplified action for copyright infringement of six photographs (the “Photographs”) decided by Prothonotary Fulanetto (as she then was). The decision under appeal awarded the author of the Photographs, Respondent Alexander Stoss, $3,983.40 in damages and $9,493.94 in costs.

Mr. Seymour appealed an Order of the Motions Judge, dismissing his motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal from a decision of the Commissioner of Patents wherein the Commissioner had refused to grant the appellant’s application for a patent.

Following a claim of patent infringement, NCS Multistage Inc. (“NCS”) filed a motion for summary judgment on the basis of non-infringement, relying on the prior use defence under section 56 of the Patent Act, RSC 1985, c P-4 (the “PA”). NCS filed a fact affidavit in support of the summary judgment motion.

In this decision, Justice McHaffie provided reasons for awarding costs. The underlying litigation was a patent infringement action where the Court dismissed Guest Tek Entertainment Ltd.’s (“Guest Tek”) claim for patent infringement, and Nomadix Inc.’s (“Nomadix”) counterclaim for declarations of invalidity.

After finding the asserted claims of DeepRoot’s patents were valid and infringed by the Defendant, GreenBlue Urban North America Inc. and dismissing GreenBlue’s counterclaim, the Court directed the parties to discuss costs and make submissions if unable to agree as to quantum.

The applicant sought to find the respondent and his company in contempt of an earlier ruling (see 2016 FC 294 affirmed 2018 FCA 222), in which infringement was found of the CSA’a 2015 Canadian Electrical Code. The alleged contempt was based on reproduction of a new version of the code through a new related corporate entity based in the United States.