Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 MAY 2012

Extending Recent Promised Utility Doctrine Beyond Pharmaceutical And Chemical Cases

Gowling WLG
Gowling WLG
Contributor
Gowling WLG

Gowling WLG

The firm The firm’s lawyers speak English, French, Russian and Ukrainian. The firm’s client base...

View firm profile
Explore more from Gowling WLG

On January 30, 2012, the Federal Court released its decision in Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée ("Bell") (2012 FC 113). It held one claim of the patent was valid and infringed. The patent relates to a skid-type landing gear for helicopters.

CanadaIntellectual Property

On January 30, 2012, the Federal Court released its decision in Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée ("Bell") (2012 FC 113). It held one claim of the patent was valid and infringed. The patent relates to a skid-type landing gear for helicopters.

In the April 4, 2012 edition of IP Report, the significance of the punitive damages awarded by Justice Martineau was discussed. In this follow-up article, we discuss another interesting aspect: the validity challenge relating to utility. While Justice Martineau upheld the patent's validity, he found several claims invalid for lack of utility.

Significantly, Justice Martineau employed the "promised utility" framework recently developed in pharmaceutical cases in this mechanical context. He began his utility analysis by construing the "promise" of the patent.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from