BrandStorm, Inc. appealed, under section 56 of the Trademarks Act, a decision of the Trademarks Opposition Board made on behalf of the Registrar of Trademarks, rejecting BrandStorm’s opposition to an application by Naturally Splendid Enterprises Ltd. for registration of the trademark NATERA in association with a broad range of food, beverage and nutritional products.

This decision is a cost award arising from a patent infringement action pursuant to subsection 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations between Allergan Inc (“Allergan”) and Sandoz Canada Inc (“Sandoz”). The underlying action related to Allergan’s exclusive license of the 2,507,002 patent (“‘002 patent”) owned by Kissei Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“Kissei”).

Apotex Inc. (“Apotex”) appealed a judgment of the Federal Court (2018 FC 1106) awarding Shire LLC (“Shire”) $1M in costs, and $600,000 in disbursements following its success at trial on a patent infringement action under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) (“PM(NOC)”) Regulations. Apotex was successful in part on its appeal.

Federal Court largely allows filing of four reply expert reports

On August 4, 2020, in TFI Foods Ltd v Every Green International Inc., 2020 FC 808, the Federal Court (the “Court”) issued an order enjoining Every Green International Inc. (“Every Green”) from offering for sale, selling, and/or labelling products bearing the trademark I-MEI Design with labels identifying Every Green as the exclusive distributor of I-MEI Foods Co, Ltd. Every Green did not comply with this order and took no further steps in its defense of the action.

Spectrum opposed Schneider’s application to register WISER. The Registrar allowed, in part, Spectrum’s opposition. Under the Trademarks Act, Spectrum and Schneider each had two months from the date of the Registrar’s decision to file an appeal.

The Plaintiff launched an action under the Trademarks Act and Copyright Act, alleging that various corporate and individual Defendants infringed the Plaintiff’s rights by engaging in licensing agreements of the Plaintiff’s trademarks without the Plaintiff’s authority.

In two patent infringement actions under subsection 6(1) of the PM (NOC) Regulations, [the Regulations], the Federal Court found the claims of the ‘437 Patent invalid for obviousness and dismissed the action for infringement against the ‘802 Patent, finding the patent valid, not obvious, and useful (29, 32).

The Defendant brought its motion before any examinations for discovery (6).

Guest Tek Interactive Entertainment Ltd. v Nomadix, Inc., 2021 FC 276