Amgen Canada Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al., 2015 FC 1261
Judge | Hughes, J. |
Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
Case Date | November 10, 2015 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | 2015 FC 1261;[2015] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.066 |
Amgen Can. Inc. v. Apotex Inc., [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.066
MLB being edited
Currently being edited for F.T.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.
Temp. Cite: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. NO.066
Amgen Canada Inc. and Amgen Inc. (applicants) v. Apotex Inc. and The Minister of Health (respondents)
(T-2072-12; 2015 FC 1261)
Indexed As: Amgen Canada Inc. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al.
Federal Court
Hughes, J.
November 10, 2015.
Summary:
Amgen Inc., was the owner of Canadian Letters Patent No. 1,341,537 ('537 patent). Amgen Canada Inc. listed the '537 patent under the provisions of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (NOC Regulations). Amgen Canada (first person) secured a Notice of Compliance from the Minister in respect of a product it called Neupogen which was a sterile solution containing a drug known as filgrastim in 300 g/mL and 600 g/mL strength for subcutaneous or intravenous administration. Apotex Inc., a Canadian, generic drug manufacturer (second person), applied to the Minister for a Notice of Compliance to sell a generic version of the Amgen Neupogen product. Apotex served a Notice of Allegation on Amgen, alleging that it would not infringe that patent and, in any event, that the patent was invalid on the grounds of novelty, obviousness and inutility. Amgen applied to prohibit the Minister from issuing a NOC to Apotex.
The Federal Court dismissed the application for the prohibition order. Amgen satisfied the court that Apotex's allegations respecting novelty and utility were not justified but did not establish that Apotex's allegations concerning lack of invention (obviousness) were not justified.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1589
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of "inventive ingenuity" (obviousness) - Particular patents - See paragraphs 81 to 107.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1593
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of "inventive ingenuity" (obviousness) - Prior art - See paragraphs 81 to 107.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1603
Grounds of invalidity - Anticipation - By previously published article or patent - See paragraphs 62 to 107.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1605
Grounds of invalidity - Anticipation - Particular patents - See paragraphs 62 to 80.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1675
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of novelty - Particular patents - See paragraphs 62 to 80.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1721
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of utility and operability - General (incl. "promise of the patent") - See paragraphs 108 to 121.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1723
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of utility and operability - Chemical products and substances intended for food and medicine - See paragraphs 108 to 121.
Patents of Invention - Topic 1725
Grounds of invalidity - Lack of utility and operability - Particular patents - See paragraphs 108 to 121.
Counsel:
Andrew Shaughnessy, Andrew Bernstein, Nicole Mantini and Yael Bienenstock, for the applicants;
Andrew Brodkin, Richard Naiberg and Jorden Scopa, for the respondent, Apotex Inc.;
No One, for the respondent, The Minister of Health.
Solicitors of Record:
Torys, LLP,, Toronto, Ontario, for the applicants;
Goodmans, LLP,, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent, Apotex Inc.;
Department of Justice, Ontario Regional Office, Toronto, Ontario, for the respondent, The Minister of Health.
This application was heard in Toronto, Ontario, on October 26 to 30, 2015, before Hughes, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision in Toronto, Ontario, on November 10, 2015.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2018 FC 259
...Pharma GP v Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933 at para 69, 385 FTR 1 [Merck-Frosst-Schering]; see also Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261 at para 45, 138 CPR (4th) 383, appeal dismissed 2016 FCA 196 [Amgen]). [70] Kennedy also submitted that the POSITA “spent the vast majority of his or ......
-
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC, 2020 FC 816
...but somewhere in the middle (Merck-Frosst-Schering Pharma GP v Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933 at para 69; Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261 at para 45). However, Justice Locke recently qualified the statement that the PSA is neither first nor last in her class because “the quality......
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2020 FCA 30
...citing Merck-Frosst-Schering Pharma GP v. Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933, 385 F.T.R. 1, at para. 69, and Amgen Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2015 FC 1261, 138 C.P.R. (4th) 383, at para. 45, aff’d on other grounds 2016 FCA 196, 141 C.P.R. (4th) 245. [79] I agree with the Judge’s reference to the......
-
Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC, 2020 FC 522
...an NOC from issuing to Apotex Inc. [Apotex] for its filgrastim biosimilar [the Apotex Application]. In Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261, Justice Hughes dismissed the Apotex Application, finding Amgen had not shown Apotex’s obviousness allegation in relation to Claim 43 of the 537......
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2018 FC 259
...Pharma GP v Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933 at para 69, 385 FTR 1 [Merck-Frosst-Schering]; see also Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261 at para 45, 138 CPR (4th) 383, appeal dismissed 2016 FCA 196 [Amgen]). [70] Kennedy also submitted that the POSITA “spent the vast majority of his or ......
-
Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC, 2020 FC 816
...but somewhere in the middle (Merck-Frosst-Schering Pharma GP v Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933 at para 69; Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261 at para 45). However, Justice Locke recently qualified the statement that the PSA is neither first nor last in her class because “the quality......
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research, 2020 FCA 30
...citing Merck-Frosst-Schering Pharma GP v. Canada (Health), 2010 FC 933, 385 F.T.R. 1, at para. 69, and Amgen Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2015 FC 1261, 138 C.P.R. (4th) 383, at para. 45, aff’d on other grounds 2016 FCA 196, 141 C.P.R. (4th) 245. [79] I agree with the Judge’s reference to the......
-
Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC, 2020 FC 522
...an NOC from issuing to Apotex Inc. [Apotex] for its filgrastim biosimilar [the Apotex Application]. In Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261, Justice Hughes dismissed the Apotex Application, finding Amgen had not shown Apotex’s obviousness allegation in relation to Claim 43 of the 537......
-
Canadian Patent Law Of Obviousness: R.I.P. Fair Expectation Of Success
...mere matter of linguistics, many obviousness decisions have since applied the relatively low "fair expectation of success" standard (e.g., 2015 FC 1261, 2015 FC 247, 2013 FC 283, 2013 FC 246, and 2010 FC 612). The underlying concept is that when a skilled person is motivated to try to obtai......
-
Amgen Sought Leave to Appeal Filgrastim Decision to the Supreme Court of Canada
...was not a principled basis for hearing the appeal despite being moot. The FCA and FC decisions can be found here (2016 FCA 196) and here (2015 FC 1261). The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your sp......
-
Amgen not precluded by invalidity decision under pre-amended PMNOC Regulations from litigating same patent under amended regulations
...under the pre-amended PMNOC Regulations: in 2015, the Federal Court dismissed Amgen’s application against Apotex (Amgen v Apotex, 2015 FC 1261 [Apotex], reported here), finding that Apotex’s allegation of obviousness was In its Notice of Allegation (NOA), Pfizer alleged the same ground of i......
-
The Biosimilar Landscape In Canada
...T-869-17, T-1269-17, T-1270-17. 15 Federal Court files T-2072-12, T-1710-15. 16 Federal Court file T-633-16. 17 Amgen Canada v Apotex Inc, 2015 FC 1261, aff'd 2015 FCA 18 Federal Court file T-934-16. The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. S......