Abbvie Corporation v. Janssen Inc.

Abbvie Corporation v. Janssen Inc.

The motion to amend was dismissed because the proposed amendments were disclosed too late, would cause non-compensable prejudice by forcing Plaintiffs to reshape their case on the eve of a lengthy trial and risk displacing the fixed trial schedule, and because the interests of justice and efficient use of scarce judicial resources did not justify adjournment or allowing the amendment.

Citation
2013 FC 1148
Parties
Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): ABBVIE CORPORATION; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): ABBVIE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH & CO. KG; Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim): ABBVIE BIOTECHNOLOGY LTD.; Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim): JANSSEN INC.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Patent Litigation (infringement and Validity Counterclaim) / Pre Trial Motion to Amend Pleadings, Case Management, on the Eve of a Scheduled Trial
Outcome
Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
Obviousness, Prior Art, Pleadings Amendment, Case Management, Costs
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Patent Law Civil Procedure Obviousness Prior Art Pleadings Amendment Case Management Costs

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ABBVIE CORPORATION

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

ABBVIE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH & CO. KG

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

ABBVIE BIOTECHNOLOGY LTD.

Plaintiff (defendant by Counterclaim)

JANSSEN INC.

Defendant (plaintiff by Counterclaim)

Procedural Posture

Patent Litigation (infringement and Validity Counterclaim) / Pre Trial Motion to Amend Pleadings, Case Management, on the Eve of a Scheduled Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to allow amendment of Schedule A to the Defence and Counterclaim to add or remove prior art
  2. 2 Whether the proposed amendments were timely and if they would cause prejudice or delay to the trial
  3. 3 Whether costs could adequately compensate any prejudice caused by the amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to amend was dismissed because the proposed amendments were disclosed too late, would cause non-compensable prejudice by forcing Plaintiffs to reshape their case on the eve of a lengthy trial and risk displacing the fixed trial schedule, and because the interests of justice and efficient use of scarce judicial resources did not justify adjournment or allowing the amendment.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • The motion to amend Schedule A to the Defence and Counterclaim is dismissed.
  • The Plaintiffs are entitled to costs in any event of the cause.