Bayer Inc. et al. v. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Co.
| Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
| Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
| Judge | Fothergill, J. |
| Citation | 2016 FC 1013 |
| Date | 07 September 2016 |
| Subject Matter | FOOD AND DRUG CONTROL,PRACTICE,PATENTS OF INVENTION |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
19 practice notes
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research
...Kennedy refers to the recent canvassing and acceptance of the experimental use exception by Justice Fothergill in Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013, 142 CPR (4th) 1 [Bayer v Apotex]: [157] Section 28.2 of the Act does not provide for an exception for experimental use. However, as recentl......
-
Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC
...of comity has no application with respect to findings of fact (at para 50). As Justice Fothergill explained in Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 [Bayer] at para 54, in the context of an action for patent infringement following an earlier NOC decision: [54] Previous findings of fact or mi......
-
Allergan Inc. v. Juno Pharmaceuticals Corp.
...7(i). [136] Allergan argues that a finding on inventive concept is a question of law that is prima facie binding: Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 [Bayer] at para 53; Apotex Inc v Pfizer Canada Inc, 2013 FC 493 at paras [137] Second, Allergan points out that the experts, including Dr. A......
-
Teva Canada Innovation v. Pharmascience Inc.
...the law recognizes that there is no disclosure for the purposes of anticipation where a prior use is experimental (Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 at paras 157, 162). If a patent cannot be anticipated by its own clinical study, in my view, it cannot be anticipated by the speculative re......
Get Started for Free
10 cases
-
Hospira Healthcare Corporation v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research
...Kennedy refers to the recent canvassing and acceptance of the experimental use exception by Justice Fothergill in Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013, 142 CPR (4 th) 1 [Bayer v Apotex]: [157] Section 28.2 of the Act does not provide for an exception for experimental use. However, as recen......
-
Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC
...of comity has no application with respect to findings of fact (at para 50). As Justice Fothergill explained in Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 [Bayer] at para 54, in the context of an action for patent infringement following an earlier NOC decision: [54] Previous findings of fact or mi......
-
Allergan Inc. v. Juno Pharmaceuticals Corp.
...7(i). [136] Allergan argues that a finding on inventive concept is a question of law that is prima facie binding: Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 [Bayer] at para 53; Apotex Inc v Pfizer Canada Inc, 2013 FC 493 at paras [137] Second, Allergan points out that the experts, including Dr. A......
-
Teva Canada Innovation v. Pharmascience Inc.
...the law recognizes that there is no disclosure for the purposes of anticipation where a prior use is experimental (Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FC 1013 at paras 157, 162). If a patent cannot be anticipated by its own clinical study, in my view, it cannot be anticipated by the speculative re......
Get Started for Free
9 firm's commentaries
-
Court Of Appeal Upholds Finding Of Infringement And Only Requires A 'Mere Scintilla' Of Utility (Intellectual Property Weekly Abstracts Bulletin (Week Of SEPTEMBER 19, 2016)
...Trial judge acknowledges stare decisis and comity in relation to findings from the previous NOC proceedings Bayer Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2016 FC 1013 This was a patent infringement action against Apotex and Cobalt, relating to a combination of drospirenone and ethinylestradiol for an effectiv......
-
Pharma In Brief - Federal Court Addresses The Relationship Between Prohibition Applications And Infringement/Impeachment Actions
...Bayer Inc. v Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Company, 2016 FC 1013 (Court Files No. T-1379-13, T-1468-13, and Drug: By Bayer Inc.: YAZ (3.0 mg drospirenone and 0.020 mg ethinyl estradiol tablets) and YASMIN (3.0 mg drospirenone and 0.030 mg ethinyl estradiol tablets) By Apotex Inc. (Apotex): MYA (3.......
-
Patent Survives Anticipation Attack Based On Use In Phase III Clinical Trial
...thus did not apply to determinations of, in this case, the person of ordinary skill in the art and findings of obviousness. Footnotes 1 2016 FC 1013 2 See Bayer Inc v Cobalt Pharmaceuticals Company, 2013 FC 1061, aff'd 2015 FCA 116 and Bayer Inc v Apotex Inc, 2014 FC 436. The content of thi......
-
Federal Court Of Appeal Confirms Patent Infringer Not Entitled To Dictate Appropriate Remedy
...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......
Get Started for Free