ARTICLE
23 September 2016

Amgen Sought Leave to Appeal Filgrastim Decision to the Supreme Court of Canada

DW
Deeth Williams Wall LLP

Contributor

Founded over 30 years ago, Deeth Williams Wall LLP has grown from seven lawyers to 20, covering all aspects of IP prosecution, commercialization and enforcement; technology law; emerging technology protection and commercialization; privacy and data breach protection, management and coaching; litigation; and regulatory law. The firm acts for a number of large businesses, including an international oilfield services company, a provincial government, a major inter-bank data network, a top-tier hospital, an international soft drink company, an international retailer, and a number of Canadian tech start-ups. The firm has acted for several international drug companies on patent litigation, PM(NOC), and regulatory matters. It also provides day-to-day patent and trademark advice for major food, chemical, automotive and retail companies. Deeth Williams Wall and its lawyers have been ranked as an industry leader both in Canada and internationally by Lexpert Magazine, Canadian Lawyer, Best Lawyers of Canada, Who’s Who L

On August 9, 2016, Amgen Canada Inc (Amgen) filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada from the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) decision in Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc.
Canada Intellectual Property

On August 9, 2016, Amgen Canada Inc (Amgen) filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada from the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) decision in Amgen Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 FCA 196 (SCC Case No. 37124). The FCA dismissed Amgen's appeal from Hughes J's dismissal of Amgen's application seeking to prohibit the Minister of Health from issuing a Notice of Compliance (NOC) to Apotex Inc (Apotex) in respect of its proposed filgrastim product (Amgen's NEUPOGEN®). The FCA dismissed the appeal, because it was moot due to the issuance of the NOC following Hughes J's decision. The FCA held that the fact that Apotex had commenced a section 8 claim against Amgen for the delayed generic entry was not a principled basis for hearing the appeal despite being moot.

The FCA and FC decisions can be found here (2016 FCA 196) and here (2015 FC 1261).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More