Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 18 SEPTEMBER 2012

Responding To Canadian Patent Office Objections: Proof Of Utility

McCarthy Tétrault
McCarthy Tétrault
Contributor
McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault

McCarthy Tétrault LLP provides a broad range of legal services, delivering strategic and...

View firm profile
Explore more from McCarthy Tétrault

This is part of a series of posts reviewing common Canadian Patent Office objections to patent applications and claimed inventions and providing some insight into how these objections may be addressed.

CanadaIntellectual Property

This is part of a series of posts reviewing common Canadian Patent Office objections to patent applications and claimed inventions and providing some insight into how these objections may be addressed.

The Objection

In a typical objection, the patent examiner asserts that the claimed composition of matter, while novel and non-obvious, cannot be patented because the application's description fails to prove the utility of all claimed embodiments. The examiner usually will rely on:

  • the definition of "invention" in section 2 of the Patent Act as the statutory basis for the objection.
  • recent case law, mainly from abbreviated proceedings under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, suggesting that utility of a claimed composition of matter must be proved in the specification, by demonstration or sound prediction, whether or not that utility is claimed.

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