Smart & Biggar

 

 
Twitter
LinkedIn
Forward
 
 
 

May 2019

 
 

IN THIS ISSUE:

Federal Court dismisses Servier's application for order of prohibition regarding salt patent for perindopril arginine

 

FCA upholds issuance of NON-W letter and cancellation of reconsideration process for Apotex omeprazole magnesium tablet ANDS

 

Infringement based on making/selling under existing NOC for one strength struck from action under the PMNOC Regulations triggered by NOA based on different strength

 

Update on PMPRB Guidelines Modernization 

 

Health Canada News

 

Proposed Regulations would amend process for sale of drugs for emergencies, including under SAP

 

Release of revised Certificates of Supplementary Protection Guidance

 

Release of Guidance Document: Regulatory requirements for Drug Identification Numbers

 

Guidance Document Re: Reporting Adverse Reactions to Marketed Health Products

 

Supreme Court of Canada News

  

New Court Proceedings

 
 

Federal Court dismisses Servier’s application for order of prohibition regarding salt patent for perindopril arginine

 
 
Katie Lee

Katie Lee
KHLee@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On May 8, 2019, Justice Roy dismissed Servier’s application for a prohibition order under the pre-amended Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations for Canadian Patent No. 2,423,825 (825 Patent) and perindopril arginine/amlodipine product (Servier’s VIACORAM): Les Laboratoires Servier v Apotex Inc, 2019 FC 616. Apotex had alleged that the patent was invalid for obviousness, overbreadth, inutility and insufficiency. The 825 Patent claimed the arginine salt of perindopril and its hydrates.

The Federal Court held that the allegations of inutility and insufficiency were not justified. However, Justice Roy dismissed the application, finding that Apotex’s allegations of obviousness and overbreadth were justified. With respect to overbreadth, the Court construed the claims to include all forms of arginine and its hydrates, whereas (1) the inventors had only ever made the perindopril salt with the naturally occurring form, L-arginine; and (2) the inventors did not have reason to believe that a hydrate of perindopril arginine could form. Based on these findings, Justice Roy found that the Servier had not discharged its burden of disproving the allegation that the claims were broader than the invention. With respect to obviousness, the Court found that arginine salts were known, and that a skilled person would have known that a structured salt screen conducted to search for a solution to the stability issues of the known salt, perindopril erbumine, would have been available by the filing date.

 
 

FCA upholds issuance of NON-W letter and cancellation of reconsideration process for Apotex omeprazole magnesium tablet ANDS

 
 
Abigail Smith

Abigail Smith

aesmith@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On April 24, 2019, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) affirmed the Federal Court’s (FC) dismissal of Apotex’s application for judicial review of a decision by the Minister of Health relating to its Apo-Omeprazole (omeprazole magnesium) delayed release tablets: Apotex Inc v Canada (Health), 2019 FCA 97. The Minister had issued a Notice of Non-Compliance – Withdrawal (NON-W) letter in respect of Apotex’s abbreviated new drug submission on the basis that the tablets were not bioequivalent to the relevant Canadian reference product. Apotex sought reconsideration, but after the parties could not agree on the formulation of the question for reconsideration, the Minister cancelled the reconsideration process and issued a final NON-W letter.

Read more >>

 
 

Infringement based on making/selling under existing NOC for one strength struck from action under the PMNOC Regulations triggered by NOA based on different strength

 
 
Lynn Ing

Lynn Ing
yling@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

The Federal Court has granted in part Pharmascience’s motion to strike out portions of Teva’s statement of claim under subsection 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (PMNOC Regulations) relating to glatiramer acetate (Teva’s COPAXONE; Pharmascience’s GLATECT): Teva Canada v Pharmascience Inc, 2019 FC 595.

Read more >>

 
 

Update on PMPRB Guidelines Modernization

Lynn Ing
yling@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

In its April 2019 NEWSletter, the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) announced that the Steering Committee on Guidelines Modernization would hold its final meeting on May 13, 2019, to discuss both a draft report of its deliberations and the Working Group’s final report (released March 6, 2019). Once the Steering Committee’s report has been finalized and the regulatory amendments have been published in Part II of the Canada Gazette (expected this spring), the PMPRB will release its draft Guidelines for public consultation.

 
 

Health Canada News

Proposed Regulations would amend process for sale of drugs for emergencies, including under SAP

Katie Lee
KHLee@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On May 3, 2019, two sets of proposed amendments to the Food and Drug Regulations were published:

  • Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Made Under the Food and Drugs Act (Sale of a New Drug for Emergency Treatment)
  • Regulations Amending Certain Regulations Concerning the Sale of Drugs (Public or Canadian Armed Forces Health Emergencies)


The proposed amendments contain provisions which would streamline the process for providing access to unauthorized drugs for medical emergencies. Access to the drugs will continue to be facilitated through the Special Access Program (SAP) for human drugs, and the Emergency Drug Release Program (EDR) for veterinary products. There are currently approximately 500 drugs with active status on the SAP and 45 in the EDR.

Read more >>

 
 

Release of revised Certificates of Supplementary Protection Guidance

 
 
Urszula Wojtyra

Urszula Wojtyra
uwojtyra@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On May 15, 2019, Health Canada released the third publication of the Guidance Document: Certificates of Supplementary Protection. The changes reflect organizational changes at Health Canada, a third version of the Certificate of Supplementary Protection application form and updates to the fee payment instructions.

 
 

Release of Guidance Document: Regulatory requirements for Drug Identification Numbers

Urszula Wojtyra
uwojtyra@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On May 3, 2019, Health Canada released the new Guidance Document: Regulatory requirements for Drug Identification Numbers (DINs). The Guidance Document is stated to provide “assistance on the interpretation of the regulatory requirements associated with a DIN” and “guidance to manufacturers on their obligation to accurately report to Health Canada [certain] notifications for a change of drug status.” This Guidance Document replaces a number of Health Canada documents including:

  • Guidance Document: Cancellation of a Drug Identification Number (DIN) and Notification of Discontinuation of Sales
  • Issuance of Drug Identification Numbers for New Drugs

 
 

Guidance Document Re: Reporting Adverse Reactions to Marketed Health Products

 
 
Brandon Heard

Brandon Heard
BRHeard@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

On May 23, 2018, Health Canada published Overview of the Reporting Adverse Reactions to Marketed Health Products - Guidance Document for Industry. “This guidance document provides market authorization holders (MAHs) with assistance on how to comply with the Food and Drugs Act, the Food and Drug Regulations and the Natural Health Products Regulations with respect to reporting adverse reactions (ARs) to marketed health products”, including: pharmaceutical drugs, biologics, radiopharmaceutical drugs and natural health products. These ARs are to be reported to the Canada Vigilance Program of the Marketed Health Products Directorate (MHPD) of Health Canada.

 
 

Supreme Court of Canada News

Brandon Heard
BRHeard@smart-biggar.ca

 
 

SCC denies Apotex leave to appeal ramipril pleadings amendment decision. As previously reported, Apotex sought leave to appeal a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal (2018 ONCA 890) permitting Sanofi and Schering to amend their defences to claims under the Ontario Statute of Monopolies, U.K. Statute of Monopolies and Trade-Marks Act. Apotex’s claims rely on Sanofi-Aventis Canada v Apotex Inc, 2009 FC 676 (“invalidity decision”), which found certain claims of Canadian Patent No. 1,341,206 invalid on the basis of the “promise doctrine”. The ONCA permitted Sanofi and Schering to plead that AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v Apotex Inc, 2017 SCC 36 – which rejected the promise doctrine as “unsound” – rendered the invalidity decision suspect. On May 16, 2019, the Supreme Court denied Apotex’s application for leave to appeal (Case No. 38471).

SCC denies Apotex leave to appeal cefaclor damages decision re: non-infringing alternative defence. As previously reported, Apotex sought leave to appeal a decision of the Federal Court of Appeal (2018 FCA 217) relating to damages awarded to Eli Lilly in respect of Apotex’s infringement of process patents relating to cefaclor. The FCA concluded that a non-infringing alternative defence was not available to Apotex. On May 23, 2019, the Supreme Court denied Apotex’s application for leave to appeal (Case No. 38485).

 
 

New Court Proceedings

For complete details about these proceedings, click here.

 
 

PMNOC Actions

ESBRIET capsules (pirfenidone): Hoffmann-La Roche and InterMune v Sandoz

NEXAVAR (sorafenib): Bayer v Teva

ACTONEL DR (sodium risedronate): Allergan v Apotex

VELCADE (bortezomib mannitol boronic ester): Janssen v Taro

Other Proceedings

SPRAVATO (esketamine hydrochloride): Janssen v The Minister of Health

 
 
Selected Rankings

 
 

Canadian Firm of the Year
LMG Life Sciences

Read more »

 

Canada’s Intellectual Property Litigation Firm of the Year
Benchmark Canada

Read more  »

 
 

EDITOR

Nancy Pei

 

     

LITIGATION CONTACTS

Gunars Gaikis

Steven Garland

Sheldon Hamilton

Yoon Kang

Nancy Pei

 

Mark Biernacki

 

Jeremy Want

 

Colin Ingram

 

PROSECUTION CONTACTS

Yoon Kang

Daphne Lainson

Thuy Nguyen

David Schwartz

Mark Pidkowich

 

 

 

   

REGULATORY CONTACTS

Nancy Pei

 

Alice Tseng

 

Daphne Lainson

 

 
 
 
 

OTTAWA / TORONTO / MONTREAL / VANCOUVER / CALGARY

 
 
 

UNPARALLELED IP

 
 
 

smart-biggar.ca

Twitter
LinkedIn
Forward to a Friend

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.