Wi-Lan Inc. v. Apple Canada Inc.

Wi-Lan Inc. v. Apple Canada Inc.

The motion to bifurcate is dismissed because Apple failed to meet its burden to show bifurcation would more likely than not produce a just, expeditious and least expensive resolution or meet proportionality principles; Wi-Lan's concession to abandon accounting of profits in a non-bifurcated trial removed the central inefficiency justification for bifurcation and rendered Apple's motion untenable.

Citation
2022 FC 276
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): Wi-Lan Inc.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): Apple Canada Inc.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): Apple Inc.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement Validity and Remedies / Interlocutory Motion (bifurcation)
Outcome
Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Standards Essential Patent (sep), FRAND, Bifurcation, Injunction, Accounting of Profits, Damages, Proportionality, Discovery
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Standards Essential Patent (sep) FRAND Bifurcation Injunction Accounting of Profits +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wi-Lan Inc.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

Apple Canada Inc.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Apple Inc.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement Validity and Remedies / Interlocutory Motion (bifurcation)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should bifurcate liability and remedies (determine validity and infringement before remedies)
  2. 2 Whether SEP/FRAND principles limit remedies available to a patent holder in Canada (injunction, delivery up, accounting of profits)
  3. 3 Whether bifurcation would more likely than not result in a just, expeditious and least expensive determination of the proceeding

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to bifurcate is dismissed because Apple failed to meet its burden to show bifurcation would more likely than not produce a just, expeditious and least expensive resolution or meet proportionality principles; Wi-Lan's concession to abandon accounting of profits in a non-bifurcated trial removed the central inefficiency justification for bifurcation and rendered Apple's motion untenable.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • Motion dismissed.
  • Costs payable forthwith by the Defendants to the Plaintiff in the amount of $4500 plus reasonable disbursements.