As previously reported, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed Abbott and Takeda’s motion for summary judgment in an action brought by Apotex under section 8 of the PMNOC Regulations. The action relates to lansoprazole, the active ingredient in Apo-Lansoprazole and Abbott’s PREVACID. On April 5, 2018, the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed Abbott and Takeda’s appeal: Apotex Inc. v Abbott Laboratories Limited, 2018 ONCA 332. The appellants argued that Apo-Lansoprazole could not and would not have received regulatory approval in April 2007 and Apotex was not entitled to damages. The Court of Appeal disagreed, concluding that the motions judge did not err in finding that Apo-Lansoprazole would have received approval in April 2007. This date was consistent with Apotex’s expert evidence and the timing of Health Canada’s letter indicating that Apo-Lansoprazole was approvable in the real world. While Health Canada subsequently reversed its position, that reversal could only be relevant to the quantum of Apotex’s damages and did not render the earlier letter void ab initio.
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