Your World of Legal Intelligence
 Canada | +1 (343) 700 0450

Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774

Judgment Cited authorities 46 Cited in 19 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionFederal Jurisdiction (Canada)
Subject MatterPRACTICE,PATENTS OF INVENTION,FOOD AND DRUG CONTROL
Citation2017 FC 774
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Date22 August 2017
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
19 practice notes
  • Angelcare Canada Inc. v. Munchkin, Inc., 2022 FC 507
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 7, 2022
    ...para. 72; Bauer Hockey Corp. v. Easton Sports Canada Inc., 2010 FC 361 at para. 250, aff’d 2011 FCA 83; Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774 at para. 247, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 (Pfizer Canada Inc.)). [Emphasis added.] [369] Justice Rennie goes on at paragraphs 75 to 77 to explain how ......
  • Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC, 2020 FC 522
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 16, 2020
    ...was that small changes in structure can have unpredictable pharmacological effects (at para 255). [363] In Pfizer Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2017 FC 774, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 , the inventive concept was a crystalline salt of a known drug. The Court found the invention was not obvious, even thou......
  • Apotex Inc. v. Shire LLC, 2021 FCA 52
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • March 11, 2021
    ...Hockey Corp. v. Easton Sports Canada Inc., 2010 FC 361 at para. 250, aff’d 2011 FCA 83 ; Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774 at para. 247, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 (Pfizer Canada Inc.)). [70] The judge did not determine the inventive concept based on some “gene......
  • Post-AstraZeneca: Has The Promise Doctrine Vanished From Patent Litigation? Likely, Yes
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 15, 2018
    ...Inc., [2017] 1 SCR 943, 2017 SCC 36 ("AstraZeneca"). 2 Bristol-Meyers Squibb v. Apotex, 2017 FCA 190; Pfizer Canada Inc v. Apotex Inc, 2017 FC 774; Pfizer Canada Inc v. Teva Canada Limited, 2017 FC 777; Regents of the University of California v. I-MED Pharma Inc, 2018 FC 164; Sernova Corp v......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Angelcare Canada Inc. v. Munchkin, Inc., 2022 FC 507
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 7, 2022
    ...para. 72; Bauer Hockey Corp. v. Easton Sports Canada Inc., 2010 FC 361 at para. 250, aff’d 2011 FCA 83; Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774 at para. 247, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 (Pfizer Canada Inc.)). [Emphasis added.] [369] Justice Rennie goes on at paragraphs 75 to 77 to explain how ......
  • Amgen Inc. v. Pfizer Canada ULC, 2020 FC 522
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 16, 2020
    ...was that small changes in structure can have unpredictable pharmacological effects (at para 255). [363] In Pfizer Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2017 FC 774, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 , the inventive concept was a crystalline salt of a known drug. The Court found the invention was not obvious, even thou......
  • Apotex Inc. v. Shire LLC, 2021 FCA 52
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • March 11, 2021
    ...Hockey Corp. v. Easton Sports Canada Inc., 2010 FC 361 at para. 250, aff’d 2011 FCA 83 ; Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774 at para. 247, aff’d 2019 FCA 16 (Pfizer Canada Inc.)). [70] The judge did not determine the inventive concept based on some “gene......
  • Teva Canada Innovation v. Pharmascience Inc., 2020 FC 1158
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • January 6, 2021
    ...can be used to establish such legal tests, it does not do so in the present case. [889] As noted in Pfizer Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2017 FC 774 at para 373, the Court will be cautious to accept answers provided by experts on legal tests that exceed their mandate and expertise: [373] However......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
11 firm's commentaries
  • Post-AstraZeneca: Has The Promise Doctrine Vanished From Patent Litigation? Likely, Yes
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • October 15, 2018
    ...Inc., [2017] 1 SCR 943, 2017 SCC 36 ("AstraZeneca"). 2 Bristol-Meyers Squibb v. Apotex, 2017 FCA 190; Pfizer Canada Inc v. Apotex Inc, 2017 FC 774; Pfizer Canada Inc v. Teva Canada Limited, 2017 FC 777; Regents of the University of California v. I-MED Pharma Inc, 2018 FC 164; Sernova Corp v......
  • Form II: Anticipation And Obviousness Of Crystal Form Patents In The Federal Court Of Canada
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • September 27, 2022
    ...8. Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Teva Canada Ltd., 2017 FC 777 aff'd 2019 FCA 15 ("Desvenlafaxine-Teva") and Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774 aff'd 2019 FCA 16 ("Desvenlafaxine-Apotex"), collectively, 9. FC Desvenlafaxine-Teva supra at para. 27. 10. FC Desvenlafaxine-Teva supra at par......
  • Canadian Patent Litigation: Five Things To Watch In 2018
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • February 16, 2018
    ...attempted to transfer promise-type arguments to other validity doctrines, including insufficiency. In Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 774, the Federal Court rejected this argument, holding that the Supreme Court did not change the law of sufficiency in the AstraZeneca decision. T......
  • Promise Me No Promises? The Five-year Anniversary Of The Supreme Court's AstraZeneca Decision
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • June 15, 2022
    ... 2017 FCA 190 [BMS Dasatinib]. 18. Bristol-Myers Squibb v Apotex, 2017 FC 296 . 19. BMS Dasatinib at para 40. 20. Pfizer v Apotex, 2017 FC 774 [Pfizer 21. Pfizer ODV at para 340. 22. Pfizer ODV at para 341. 23. Pfizer ODV at para 341. 24. As per internal student research. The authors are ......
    • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT