After the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) held that AstraZeneca’s patent relating to esomeprazole (NEXIUM) was not invalid for inutility and the SCC’s dismissal of Apotex’s post-judgment motion for reconsideration and rehearing, 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.
Related Publications & Articles
-
Dexlansoprazole formulation patent invalid and not infringed by Apotex
On February 7, 2024, the Federal Court dismissed Takeda’s action under subsection 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations in relation to dexlansoprazole (Takeda’s DEXILANT).Read More -
FCA upholds inducement of infringement findings relating to paliperidone palmitate
On January 12, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed both appeals: Apotex Inc v Janssen Inc, 2024 FCA 9 and Pharmascience Inc v Janssen Inc, 2024 FCA 10.Read More -
Federal Court of Appeal affirms paliperidone palmitate claims are not unpatentable methods of medical treatment
On February 1, 2024, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed Pharmascience’s appeal. Per the FCA, whether a claimed dosing regimen is an unpatentable method of medical treatment cannot be based ex...Read More