Our Blog

Removed as inventor with no right to submit evidence: Baksh v. ProbioHealth

December 07, 2012

Baksh v. ProbioHealth, LLC, 2012 FC 1388, is a peculiar case about dealing with inventorship disputes in a Canadian patent application.  All of this could have been avoided by ensuring that proper…

Read More
Viagra patent invalidated: SCC suggests patentee “gaming” the patent system

November 09, 2012

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released a decision that underlines a patentee’s disclosure requirements under the Patent Act.  This decision is another in a…

Read More
Update: en banc re-hearing for CLS Bank v. Alice

October 16, 2012

In a previous post, here, we noted the sharp division in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the issue of patent-eligible subject matter…

Read More
Continued division over “abstract ideas” test in the CAFC: CLS Bank v. Alice Corp.

July 10, 2012

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is again divided on the test for patent-eligible subject matter, with the majority and minority exchanging biting comments.  The CAFC decision in CLS…

Read More
Twitter’s IPA: does it live up to the hype?

April 17, 2012

Twitter is being lauded for its “revolutionary” Innovator’s Patent Agreement (IPA), on the basis that it purports to “put ownership of patents back in the hands of the inventors”.  But what does it actually do? Twitter posted the IPA recently 

Read More
An “object” clause is not necessarily a promise, says Federal Court of Appeal

April 17, 2012

It used to be common practice to include an “object clause” in a patent specification to clearly set out an over-arching objective of the invention.  Many granted patents have multiple object clauses, setting out a number of goals for the invention.  This practice died away as patent drafters came…

Read More
Open war-of-words at CAFC: Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore & Associates

February 10, 2012

Newman, J. and Gajarsa, J. engage in open warfare in their respective reasons in Bard Peripheral Vascular v. W.L. Gore & Associates. The judgment is a Court of Appeals for the Federal…

Read More
Broken promises: Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter

February 09, 2012

The judgment of Martineau J. in Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée, 2012 FC 113, was released recently.  It represents a win for Eurocopter in that Bell…

Read More
A fuzzy line being drawn by the CAFC to circumscribe “abstract ideas”

January 26, 2012

A trio of recent Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) cases, including last week’s decision in DealerTrack v. Huber, give some insight into what the Court considers a patentable…

Read More
Plavix patent from 2008 SCC Sanofi judgment now invalidated

January 12, 2012

In 2008 the Supreme Court of Canada handed down one of the most significant patent law judgments of the past decade in Apotex v. Sanofi, 2008 SCC 61. That judgment set the modern tests for evaluating…

Read More


accelerated examination, accounting of profits, allowance, anticipation, assignments, blockchain, budget, confusion, copyright, costs, duty of disclosure, early disclosure, examination, filing strategies, fintech, graphical user interfaces, industrial design, inventorship, open source, opposition, patent appeal board, patentable subject matter, patents, PCT, prior use rights, promises of the patent, provisional patents, software patents, sufficient disclosure, Technological Protection Measures, TPM, trade secrets, trademarks

Would you like to learn more about the work we do?

Call us at (416) 479-8647 or contact us at mailbox@rowandlaw.com