Your search for ‘Valmet’ returned 42 results

You will need to start considering your constitutive documents and existing governance mechanics.

Unlike in some other jurisdictions, Canada's patent legislation (the Patent Act) does not explicitly specify all of the circumstances under which a patent may be held to be infringed.

The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the validity of Canadian Patent 2,436,668 which covers Form I ODV succinate (marketed as PRISTIQ) in two separate appeals by Apotex Inc. and Teva Canada Ltd, finding that the claims were novel and inventive.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently granted a petition for a panel rehearing by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and withdrew a component of a published decision that would have prohibited the ITC's practice of circumscribing the scope of Federal Circuit reviews of ITC decisions

When a patent is infringed in Canada, a successful plaintiff can elect damages, or an accounting of the profits the defendant made by infringing.

Federal Court of Appeal in Bristol-Myers Squibb Canada Co. v Teva Canada Limited, 2017 FCA 76 upheld Justice Mactavish's decision reported at 2016 FC 580 in a case regarding a patent...

In General Electric Co. v. International Trade Commission, No. 10-1223 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 29, 2012)

A Saskatchewan court has awarded damages for the first time under Canada's Plant Breeders' Rights Act, establishing a novel framework for calculating infringement damages by drawing on patent law principles. The decision addresses how courts should quantify losses when farmers illegally sell protected seed varieties, marking a significant development for plant breeders seeking to enforce their exclusive rights after more than 35 years of the Act being in force.

On November 6, 2008, the Supreme Court released its decision in Apotex Inc. v. Sanofi-Synthelabo Canada Inc.

While courts have often warned that hindsight bias should be avoided when assessing whether a patented invention would have been obvious to the skilled person...

A recent decision in the United Kingdom suggests that the strict priority approach applied in the European Patent Office (EPO) Boards of Appeal will also be enforced in that jurisdiction against patentees relying on the filing dates of earlier applications.

Ironically, it is not so obvious as to how to apply the Canadian law of obviousness.

This article considers recent appellate decisions in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Canada to consider the approach they have followed concerning the use of trademarks on the Internet and jurisdiction.

The Federal Court of Appeal ("FCA") recently affirmed a Federal Court ("FC") finding that an antiviral salt was obvious, although based on different reasoning

I hope that everyone is having a great start to the holiday season. To kick off the festive fervor, in this edition, we're featuring a guest article from a fellow EV...

In the wake of the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs (see IP Update, Vol. 14, No. 6) the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once again wrestled with the issue of when a patent claim is directed to a non-patent eligible "abstract idea."