Proslide Technology, Inc. v. Whitewater West Industries, Ltd., 2024 FC 175
Justice Manson - 2024-02-02
Read full decision. Automatically generated summary:
WhiteWater appeals the order of the Associate Judge pursuant to Rule 51 of the Federal Courts Rules. The Order denied, in part, WhiteWater’s motion for leave to amend its Statement of Defence and Counterclaim. For the reasons that follow, I dismiss the appeal. ... The amendments at issue before the Court on this appeal allege that the impugned patents fail to correctly and fully describe the invention and are consequently invalid (the “Sufficiency Amendments”). ... Accordingly, the Associate Judge was correct to say that a patentee is not required to disclose all preferred embodiments, potential commercial products, or other information known to it that are not relevant to the invention as claimed in the patent. He made no error in his articulation of the law of sufficiency of disclosure. ... In the absence of other material facts and not legal conclusions or conclusory statements to support the allegations within the Sufficiency Amendments, it was open to the Associate Judge to find that the amendments have no reasonable prospect of success.
Decision relates to:
- T-1449-20 - Proslide Technology, Inc. v. Whitewater West Industries, Ltd.
- A-58-24 - which is an appeal from this decision