Canada Case Law

McCain Foods Limited v. J.R. Simplot Company

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court did not commit a palpable and overriding error in its factual appreciation of expert evidence and common general knowledge; 'high electric field' in Claim 1 is properly understood by a skilled person at the date of publication to refer to electric fields in the range of about 2 to 200 V/cm, which excludes Simplot's pulsed electric field systems, and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Claim construction
• Infringement
• Invalidity
• Utility
• Person skilled in the art
• Standard of review

Read case analysis

Advanced Powders & Coatings Inc. v. Tekna Plasma Systems Inc.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court did not err: the claims were ambiguous because a skilled reader could not reliably distinguish the claimed 'depletion layer' from the native oxide layer (502 Patent) nor determine the existence or parameters of a depletion layer (236 Patent); therefore the claims failed the distinctness/notice requirement and are invalid for ambiguity, and the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Claim construction
• Ambiguity (patent indefiniteness)
• Invalidity
• Infringement
• Insufficiency
• Costs

Read case analysis

Matsumoto v. Canuck Eats Inc.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court granted default judgment in part, finding Matsumoto owned copyright in two photographs reproduced without authorization and awarding damages, punitive damages, costs, and a permanent injunction.

• Copyright ownership
• Standing
• Infringement
• Moral rights
• Damages
• Injunction

Read case analysis

Adeia Guides Inc. v. Videotron Ltd.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court considered patent validity, claim construction, infringement, and remedies in a dispute between Adeia Guides Inc. and Videotron Ltd. over interactive television technologies.

• Infringement
• Validity
• Claim construction
• Anticipation
• Obviousness
• Double patenting

Read case analysis

NCS Multistage Inc. v. Kobold Corporation

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court erred in law by misapplying claim differentiation and treating dependent-claim limitations (the sealed embodiment) as excluded from the broader claims; properly construed, claims 6, 11, 12 and 16 of the 571 patent encompass both the sealed and gap embodiments; because claim construction was legally incorrect the question of obviousness double patenting in view of claim 17 of the 830 patent must be remitted to the Federal Court for re-determination; the trial judge's lump sum costs award of $1,800,000 was procedurally and evidentially flawed and is set aside and replaced with…

Source excerpt

• Claim construction
• Obviousness double patenting
• Infringement
• Lump sum costs
• Procedural fairness

Read case analysis

1048547 ONTARIO INC. v. FROMFROID S.A.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court of Appeal held that the trial judge’s factual findings and inferences based on circumstantial evidence that the cooling cells were built before patent expiry were not palpably and overridingly erroneous; the trial judge reasonably concluded that the appellant engaged in conduct intended to mislead the court warranting punitive damages and correctly calculated compensatory damages using Fromfroid’s latest proposal, so the appeal is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Infringement
• Punitive damages
• Compensatory damages
• Evidence and credibility
• Presumptions of fact

Read case analysis

AGI Suretrack, LLC v. Farmers Edge Inc.

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Court affirmed the Federal Court’s purposive construction limiting 'manufacturer code' and 'device class' to their ISO meanings, found those parameters and the microprocessor location to be essential based on the disclosure and lack of contrary expert evidence, held the CanPlug and FarmCommand did not include the essential ISO parameters so did not infringe, and concluded the '742 Patent is invalid because the GreenStar 3 anticipated the device claims and the remaining device and system claims were obvious in light of ISO and the common general knowledge; accordingly the appeals were dism…

Source excerpt

• Infringement
• Anticipation
• Obviousness
• Claim construction
• Essentiality
• Costs

Read case analysis

McCain Foods Limited v. J.R. Simplot Company

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court construed key patent terms in McCain’s potato-processing patent, found Simplot’s PEF process outside the claims, and dismissed the action.

• Claim construction
• Infringement
• Patent validity
• Overbreadth
• Utility (sound prediction)
• Anticipation

Read case analysis

Dermaspark Products Inc. v. Aveena Cosmetic Clinic Inc.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a motion for default judgment in a trademark case, finding the plaintiffs had not proven ownership of the asserted marks on the evidence filed.

• Default judgment
• Trademark ownership
• Infringement
• Passing off
• Injunctive relief
• Damages

Read case analysis

Double Diamond Distribution Ltd. v. Crocs Canada

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals and the motions for new evidence because the Federal Court's findings on validity, infringement, accounting and costs were within its fact‑finding and discretionary authority and contained no palpable and overriding error; the proposed new evidence was neither practically conclusive nor warranted residual admission; reliance on the Tabib Order for costs was permissible.

Source excerpt

• Industrial design
• Infringement
• Validity
• Accounting of profits
• Costs award
• Admissibility of evidence

Read case analysis