Removed as inventor with no right to submit evidence: Baksh v. ProbioHealth
December 07, 2012
Baksh v. ProbioHealth, LLC, 2012 FC 1388, is a peculiar case about dealing with inventorship disputes in a Canadian patent application. All of this could have been avoided by ensuring that proper…
Read MoreViagra patent invalidated: SCC suggests patentee “gaming” the patent system
November 09, 2012
Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released a decision that underlines a patentee’s disclosure requirements under the Patent Act. This decision is another in a…
Read MoreUpdate: en banc re-hearing for CLS Bank v. Alice
October 16, 2012
In a previous post, here, we noted the sharp division in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the issue of patent-eligible subject matter…
Read MoreContinued division over “abstract ideas” test in the CAFC: CLS Bank v. Alice Corp.
July 10, 2012
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is again divided on the test for patent-eligible subject matter, with the majority and minority exchanging biting comments. The CAFC decision in CLS…
Read MoreTwitter’s IPA: does it live up to the hype?
April 17, 2012
Twitter is being lauded for its “revolutionary” Innovator’s Patent Agreement (IPA), on the basis that it purports to “put ownership of patents back in the hands of the inventors”. But what does it actually do? Twitter posted the IPA recently
Read MoreAn “object” clause is not necessarily a promise, says Federal Court of Appeal
April 17, 2012
It used to be common practice to include an “object clause” in a patent specification to clearly set out an over-arching objective of the invention. Many granted patents have multiple object clauses, setting out a number of goals for the invention. This practice died away as patent drafters came…
Read MoreOpen war-of-words at CAFC: Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore & Associates
February 10, 2012
Newman, J. and Gajarsa, J. engage in open warfare in their respective reasons in Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore & Associates. The judgment is a Court of Appeals for the Federal…
Read MoreBroken promises: Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter
February 09, 2012
The judgment of Martineau J. in Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée, 2012 FC 113, was released recently. It represents a win for Eurocopter in that Bell…
Read MoreA fuzzy line being drawn by the CAFC to circumscribe “abstract ideas”
January 26, 2012
A trio of recent Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) cases, including last week’s decision in DealerTrack v. Huber, give some insight into what the Court considers a patentable…
Read MorePlavix patent from 2008 SCC Sanofi judgment now invalidated
January 12, 2012
In 2008 the Supreme Court of Canada handed down one of the most significant patent law judgments of the past decade in Apotex v. Sanofi, 2008 SCC 61. That judgment set the modern tests for evaluating…
Read More