Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 344
| Judge | Zinn, J. |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Case Date | April 01, 2016 |
| Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
| Citations | 2016 FC 344 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
12 practice notes
-
Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Canada (Health), 2016 FC 856
...was), at paras 94-96; Takeda Canada Inc. v Canada (Health), 2015 FC 570 , per O’Reilly J, at paras 27, 29; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344, per Zinn J, at para 13. For this reason, it asks the Court to assess greater weight to the opinions of its experts when addressing these issues......
-
Gilead Sciences Inc. et al. v. Canada (Minister of Health) et al., 2016 FC 857
...2014 FC 1070, per Gleason J, at paras 94-96; Takeda v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 570, per O’Reilly J, at paras 27, 29; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344, per Zinn J, at para 13. For this reason, it asks the Court to assess greater weight to the opinions of its experts when addressing these is......
-
Shire Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. et al., 2016 FC 382
... 2014 FC 638 at para 321 [ AstraZeneca ]; Takeda Canada Inc v Canada (Health) , 2015 FC 570 at para 29; and Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc , 2016 FC 344 at para 13. [44] For its part, Shire argues that blinding of experts is not a requirement and there is no principle of law whereby testimony......
-
The Federal Court Does The Hokey Pokey With The Disclosure Requirement In The Sound Prediction Of Utility
...Canada Inc, 2011 FCA 236 paras 42-44 & 51-52; Eli Lilly Canada Inc v Hospira Healthcare Corp, 2016 FC 47; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344 3 See for example, Eli Lilly & Co v Teva Canada Limited, 2011 FCA 220; Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2011 FCA 300; Ratiopharm In......
Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
-
Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Canada (Health), 2016 FC 856
...was), at paras 94-96; Takeda Canada Inc. v Canada (Health), 2015 FC 570 , per O’Reilly J, at paras 27, 29; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344, per Zinn J, at para 13. For this reason, it asks the Court to assess greater weight to the opinions of its experts when addressing these issues......
-
Gilead Sciences Inc. et al. v. Canada (Minister of Health) et al., 2016 FC 857
...2014 FC 1070, per Gleason J, at paras 94-96; Takeda v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 570, per O’Reilly J, at paras 27, 29; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344, per Zinn J, at para 13. For this reason, it asks the Court to assess greater weight to the opinions of its experts when addressing these is......
-
Shire Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. et al., 2016 FC 382
... 2014 FC 638 at para 321 [ AstraZeneca ]; Takeda Canada Inc v Canada (Health) , 2015 FC 570 at para 29; and Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc , 2016 FC 344 at para 13. [44] For its part, Shire argues that blinding of experts is not a requirement and there is no principle of law whereby testimony......
-
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2018 FC 736
...with Apotex that the criticisms are without merit or are irrelevant. I endorse the comments of Justice Zinn in Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344 at paragraphs 20 and 21: [20] Allergan submits that the 49 references cited in Apotex’s NOA are not representative of the common general know......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 firm's commentaries
-
The Federal Court Does The Hokey Pokey With The Disclosure Requirement In The Sound Prediction Of Utility
...Canada Inc, 2011 FCA 236 paras 42-44 & 51-52; Eli Lilly Canada Inc v Hospira Healthcare Corp, 2016 FC 47; Allergan Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 344 3 See for example, Eli Lilly & Co v Teva Canada Limited, 2011 FCA 220; Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2011 FCA 300; Ratiopharm In......
-
SCC Rejects Promise Doctrine In Seminal Pharmaceutical Patent Case
...- see for example Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée v Eurocopter, 2013 FCA 219 at paras 151 to 155 and Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 344 at para 57). Arguments in the past have asserted that such disclosure requirements were incorrect and outside Canada's treaty obligations (se......
-
Pharma In Brief - Sound Prediction Of Patent Utility Disclosure Requirements Remain In Flux: Federal Court Dismisses Gatifloxacin Prohibition Application
...Allergan Inc. v Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 344 Drug: ZYMAR® Nature of case: Prohibition application pursuant to section 6 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133 (the Regulations) Successful party: Apotex Inc. Date of decision: April 1, 2016 Summary Allergan Inc. ......
-
Motion For Interim Injunction Dismissed For Failing To Establish Irreparable Harm (Intellectual Property Weekly Abstracts Bulletin Week Of April 11)
...Witness' Evidence Given Less Weight because not Blinded to Patent or Issues; NOC Proceeding Dismissed Allergan Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 344 Drug: Apotex sent a NOA in respect of a single patent, alleging obviousness and lack of utility. The Court held that allegation was justified. In c......
Request a trial to view additional results