PATENTS |
Pfizer Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc.
T-2096-00
2002 FCT 152, Blanchard J.
11/2/02
5 pp.
Motion by respondent Apotex Inc. appealing order of Prothonotary Aronovitch restricting use of documentary evidence (prior art references) at hearing of matter-- Apotex's notice of allegations of invalidity supported by 96 prior art references--Applicants seeking order prohibiting respondent Minister of Health from issuing notice of compliance to Apotex in respect of medicine sertraline-- Prothonotary applying F.C.A. decision in AB Hassle v. Canada (Minister of National Health and Welfare) (2000), 7 C.P.R. (4th) 272--Prior art references at issue doing more than establishing state of knowledge of person skilled in art at time of filing of patent--Documents expanding factual basis of allegations made beyond that set out in notice of allegation--F.C.A. in Hassle finding this not permissible-- Prothonotary did not err in applying principles set out in Hassle to impugned prior art evidence--Open to Prothonotary to limit use of prior art properly used in cross-examination, to preclude introduction in argument on validity of patent in application--Argument put forward by respondent Apotex of alleged unworkable evidentiary dichotomy ill-founded--Prothonotary did not commit error of law in considering applicants' motion, in concluding as she did--Not clearly wrong in exercise of discretion-- Motion dismissed.