Janssen Inc. v. Teva Canada Limited, 2015 FCA
36 The Court of Appeal granted Teva's motion to have an appeal
from a NOC Proceeding dismissed as moot. The Respondent's
request for an oral hearing of the motion was denied. The FCA held that the appeal was moot, as Teva had received its
NOC. The FCA also refused to exercise its discretion to hear the
appeal, holding that it would not serve judicial economy. The FCA
dismissed the argument that the Comprehensive Economic and
Trade Agreement with Europe should prompt it to hear the
appeal, as the treaty has not yet been implemented by statute.
Furthermore, a new Notice of Allegation relating to a different
route of administration was held to not give rise to an adversarial
context between the parties in this case. Bristol-Myers Squibb & Gilead Sciences, LLC v.
Teva Canada Limited, 2015 FCA 3 The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of a decision of the
Court in a NOC proceeding finding that an allegation of
non-infringement was justified. The Court of Appeal confirmed the finding by the Court that the tests
conducted by the Appellants were not shown to be a "reliable
proxy" for the process used by Teva to manufacture its
tablets. As a result, the Appellants had not proven that the
tablets made by Teva infringed the patent. The Court of Appeal stated that the requirement that a second
person present evidence to put their allegations into play relates
only to allegations of invalidity in light of the presumption of
validity. There is no initial onus on the second person to
introduce evidence. The Court of Appeal also found that the
Appellants did not demonstrate any palpable and overriding error by
the Court in failing to draw an adverse inference against Teva for
not producing its tablets. Geophysical Service Incorporated v Arcis
Seismic Solutions Corp, 2015 ABQB 88 Geophyical Service Incorporated (GSI) commenced an action that
includes a claim for copyright infringement. GSI claims all IP
rights in the data it gathers and markets to oil and gas
exploration companies. Some of the data GSI collects must go to the
National Energy Board (NEB) who can, after a period of time has
elapsed, disclose the confidential information to those who apply
for it. GSI claims the NEB sent copies of its data to the other
defendants and failed to protect GSI's property interest. The defendants claimed that Alberta lacked jurisdiction to hear
the claim. In the alternative, the defendants argued if there was
jurisdiction, the better forum would be Newfoundland and Labrador.
Although the master had agreed with the defendants and dismissed
the claim, this ruling was overturned on appeal to the Queen's
Bench. Following the Supreme Court's ruling in SOCAN v. Cdn. Assn. of Internet
Providers, 2004 SCC 45, Alberta was found to be the
site of any alleged copyright infringement for the purposes of this
application due to the fact that the materials were sent to and
received in Alberta. That provided a real and substantial
connection to Alberta for the subject matter of the litigation. The
presumption was not rebutted by the fact that parts of the
copyright infringement occurred in Newfoundland and Labrador. Health Canada has updated the Guidance Document: Patented Medicines
(Notice of Compliance) Regulations. The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.PATENTS
Appeal in NOC Proceeding Dismissed as Moot
Finding of Non-Infringement Upheld onAppeal
COPYRIGHT
Alberta Court Has Jurisdiction to Hear aClaim for Copyright
Infringement after Materials are Sent from Newfoundland andLabrador
to Alberta
OTHER INDUSTRY NEWS