Eli Lilly Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc.
ELI LILLY CANADA INC.
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
LILLY DEL CARIBE, INC.
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
LILLY, S.A.
Law Firm / Organization
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
APOTEX INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Goodmans LLP
PHARMASCIENCE INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Aitken Klee LLP
Lawyer(s)

Aleem Abdullah

LABORATOIRE RIVA INC.
Law Firm / Organization
Aitken Klee LLP
Lawyer(s)

Aleem Abdullah

MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS ULC
TEVA CANADA LIMITED
Law Firm / Organization
Aitken Klee LLP
Lawyer(s)

Scott Beeser

  • Facts: Eli Lilly Canada Inc. and others (Lilly) appealed Federal Court decisions invalidating claims of their Canadian Patent No. 2371684 (the '684 Patent) for tadalafil, used to treat erectile dysfunction, on grounds of anticipation and obviousness. Respondents included generic drug manufacturers such as Apotex Inc.
  • Issues/Main Discussion: The appeals focused on whether the '684 Patent claims were obvious or anticipated by prior art, and whether the patent was a selection patent offering unexpected advantages.
  • Ruling: The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals, upholding the Federal Court’s findings that the asserted claims were invalid for anticipation and obviousness. The Court did not need to address whether the '684 Patent was a selection patent, as it found the patent obvious in light of prior art.
  • Amount Awarded: The summary does not specify an amount awarded; the focus was on the validity of the patent claims.
Federal Court of Appeal
A-234-20; A-236-20; A-237-20; A-238-20
Intellectual property
Respondent