Background:

• Apotex contested a Federal Court decision asserting that its generic version of INVEGA SUSTENNA would infringe Janssen’s Canadian Patent No. 2655335, related to a schizophrenia treatment regimen.

Legal Issue:

• The appeal focused on whether Apotex would induce infringement of the '335 Patent by marketing its generic version of INVEGA SUSTENNA.

Court’s Analysis and Decision:

• The court examined the second prong of the inducing infringement test, which deals with the inducer’s influence leading to the infringing act.
• Apotex’s argument revolved around the claim that its influence, via the product monograph, would not be sufficient to meet the high threshold for inducing infringement.
• The Federal Court found that the infringement would occur influenced by Apotex’s actions, thereby satisfying the second prong of the inducement test.

Outcome:

• The appeal was dismissed, with the court affirming the Federal Court’s ruling that Apotex would indeed induce infringement of the '335 Patent. Costs were awarded to Janssen in the agreed amount of $10,000, all-inclusive.