After the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that AstraZeneca's patent relating to esomeprazole (NEXIUM) was not invalid for inutility (see SCC strikes down "promise doctrine") and the SCC's dismissal of Apotex's post-judgment motion for reconsideration and rehearing (see Update on AstraZeneca SCC), Apotex sought to raise new grounds of patent invalidity in the Federal Court, premised on "overpromising" under insufficiency, wilful misleading and overbreadth. Justice Locke dismissed Apotex's motion (AstraZeneca v Apotex, 2018 FC 185): the validity of the patent was finally decided by the SCC; any doubt that might have remained about the SCC's intent was resolved by the SCC's dismissal of Apotex's motion. Justice Locke also held that AstraZeneca was entitled to a declaration of infringement and ordered the quantification of AstraZeneca's damages or Apotex's profits. Apotex has appealed.
The preceding is intended as a timely update on Canadian intellectual property and technology law. The content is informational only and does not constitute legal or professional advice. To obtain such advice, please communicate with our offices directly.