Summary: Gilead Sciences, Inc. and Gilead Sciences Canada, Inc. (collectively "Gilead") are involved in litigation against Jamp Pharma Corporation ("Jamp") over alleged infringements of Canadian Patents No. 2,845,553 and No. 2,990,210, related to pharmaceutical formulations containing tenofovir and emtricitabine. Gilead seeks declarations of infringement and injunctive relief, while Jamp disputes the infringement and claims the patents are invalid.

Key Points:

• Expert Evidence Dispute: Gilead motioned to strike certain responding expert reports submitted by Jamp, arguing that they involve improper case-splitting and are non-responsive, potentially causing prejudice to Gilead.
• Court's Analysis: The court analyzed the admissibility of the responding expert reports, considering whether they veer into non-responsive areas or merely disagree with Gilead's experts, which would be more suitably addressed during cross-examination at trial.
• Decision on Expert Reports: The court decided not to strike the contested reports, noting that they did not constitute case-splitting or veer into non-responsive areas. The reports are seen as reiterations of previous views or providing new opinions that are within the scope of the litigation.
• Admission of Expert Reports: The court also allowed Gilead to file an expert reply report, maintaining fairness in the proceedings.

Outcome: The motions to strike Jamp’s responding expert reports were refused, and Gilead’s request to file an expert reply report was granted. The decision emphasized the importance of expert testimony in clarifying technical issues pertinent to the case, and no costs were awarded.