The Federal Court previously found that Apotex and Cobalt infringed Bayer’s valid patent for an oral contraceptive composition combining drospirenone and ethinyl estradiol (Bayer’s YAZ and YASMIN) (2016 FC 1013, as reported here). The Federal Court subsequently held that Bayer was entitled to elect between damages and an accounting of Apotex’s profits (2016 FC 1192, as reported here). In so holding, the Federal Court disagreed with Apotex’s argument that it, rather than Bayer, should be entitled to elect whether Bayer should be limited to recovering Apotex’s profits. The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal of the latter decision, holding that “the proposition that the infringer of a patent can determine the remedy to which the patentee is entitled is an astounding proposition” (Apotex Inc v Bayer Inc, 2018 FCA 32). The Federal Court of Appeal affirmed that, under the Patent Act, a successful patentee always has a right to its damages, and only it has the right to elect an accounting of profits, subject to the court’s discretion.
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