In Unicrop Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General) (2010 FC 61), the Federal Court (FC) upheld the Commissioner of Patents’ decision finding Canadian Patent Application No. 2,531,185 (the ‘185 Application) abandoned. The FC confirmed that only the “authorized correspondent” could act on behalf of the applicant to pay fees and request reinstatement. The FC also held that equitable relief was not available where granting it would be contrary to statutory requirements. (more…)
Archive for the ‘Canada’ Category
FC Accepts Evidence that Extraterritorial Website Was Accessible from Canada for Purposes of Section 45 of the Trade-marks Act
In Curb v. Smart & Biggar, the applicant — a well known American record producer — successfully petitioned the Federal Court to set aside the Registrar’s decision to strike certain wares and services from his registration of the mark CURB RECORDS. The Court found that the additional evidence the applicant had filed on appeal was sufficient to establish use for the purposes of § 45 of the Trade-marks Act (the “Act“). In particular, the Court held that under the circumstances, evidence that the applicant’s multimedia website was accessible from Canada was sufficient to show use with respect to the provision of “entertainment services provided by pre-recorded music,” even though the site was hosted abroad. However, the Court disregarded evidence that the applicant had sold t-shirts and caps bearing the mark in Canada “and/or” the United States for lack of specificity, affirming the Registrar’s decision to strike those wares from the applicant’s registration. (more…)
Posted in Canada: Trademarks 
Tags: evidence of use, extraterritorial website, Section 45 
No Comments »FC holds failure to identify adverse prior art in disclosed reference violates duty of good faith; invalidates Alzheimers treatment for anticipation, obviousness, and utility
In Lundbeck Canada v. Minister of Health, 2009 FC 1102, the Federal Court of Canada (FC) dismissed Lundbeck’s prohibition application against Ratiopharm in respect of two patents relating to memantine hydrochloride. Canadian patents 2,014,453 (‘453 patent) and 2,426,492 (‘492 patent) were listed by Lundbeck on the Patent Register under section 4 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, SOR/93-133 (PMNOC Regulations). The patents relate to memantine, a drug used to treat individuals with Alzheimers. The ‘453 patent outlines the mechanism of action for memantine and the ‘492 patent suggests a method for combining memantine with other acetylcholine inhibitors (ACE inhibitors) to provide a synergistic effect. Ratiopharm served a Notice of Allegation on Lundbeck alleging that both the ‘453 and the ‘492 patents were invalid. The FC ruled that Ratiopharm’s allegations of invalidity were justified with respect to both patents. In doing so, the FC employed the tests for anticipation, obviousness, utility and found a lack of good faith prosecution due to the failure to specifically identify adverse material in a disclosed prior art reference. (more…)
FC Rules TM Applications Not to Be Dissected by Sound, Confirms Patients Perspective Plays a Role in Confusion Analysis of Pharmaceutical Marks
In NPS Pharmaceuticals v. Biofarma (2009 FC 172), the Federal Court upheld the Trade-marks Opposition Board’s (“the Board”) decision to dismiss NPS Pharmaceuticals’ (“NPS”) application to register the mark PREOS based on proposed use in association with pharmaceutical preparations for the treatment of certain bone diseases. Biofarma, Société par Actions Simplifiée (Biofarma), whose proposed marks PROTOS and PROTELOS had been accepted, but not yet registered, in association with nearly identical wares, opposed the application. (more…)
FC Finds New Invoices Correlating Wares to Previously Meaningless Product Codes Demonstrates Use (II)
In Loro Piana S.P.A. v. Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (2009 FC 1096), the Federal Court reversed a Hearing Officer’s decision to delete certain wares from Loro Piana’s mark, ING. LORO PIANA & C. (“the PIANA mark”), for non-use. On appeal, Loro Piana was able to show that invoices that had been before the Hearing Officer, which referred to the wares in question by code in fact established use, by filing additional exhibits explaining the meaning of those codes. The Court also held that, by adding the text “FABRICS MADE IN ITALY” and “Super 120’s,” Loro Piana had not deviated from the registered form of its trademark as the text would not have been perceived as forming part of the PIANA mark itself. Similarly, cautious variations can be made from a mark, in this case, Loro Piana used a script version of the PIANA mark, so long as the same dominant features of a mark are maintained and the differences are not so unimportant as not to mislead an unaware purchaser. (more…)
Posted in Canada: Trademarks Tags: New evidence, non-use, Section 45, standard of review, Variations No Comments »FC Finds New Invoices Correlating Wares to Previously Meaningless Product Codes Demonstrates Use (I)
In Loro Piana S.P.A. v. Canadian Council of Professional Engineers (2009 FC 1095), the Federal Court reversed a Hearing Officer’s decision to delete certain wares from Loro Piana’s mark ING. LORO PIANA & C. & DESIGN (the “Mark”), for non-use. On appeal, Loro Piana was able to show that invoices that had been before the Hearing Officer, which referred to the wares in question by code, in fact established use by filing additional exhibits explaining the meaning of those codes. The Court also held that by adding the text “FABRICS MADE IN ITALY,” Loro Piana had not deviated from the registered form of its trademark as the text would not have been perceived as forming part of the mark itself. (more…)
Posted in Canada: Trademarks Tags: New evidence, non-use, Section 45, standard of review No Comments »
|