38 | Big Suits
OTHER
LEXPERTRANKED
LAWYERS
Anisman, Philip, Philip Anisman, Barrister & Solicitor
Barin, Babak, Barin Avocats
Barsalou, Pierre, Barsalou Lawson Rheault Barristers & Solicitors
Beckett, QC, Clarence A., Patterson Law
Belleau, Daniel, Belleau Lapointe, s.e.n.c.r.l.
Belmore, Neil R., Belmore Neidrauer LLP
Branch, Ward K., Branch MacMaster LLP
Brock, QC, Brian J.E., Dutton Brock LLP
Carroll, QC, D. Kevin, Carroll Heyd Chown LLP
Casavant, Jean-Pierre, Casavant Mercier
Chochla, Morris A., Forbes Chochla LLP
Couzin, Robert, Couzin Taylor LLP
Godden, Cameron C.R., Bell, Temple
Grenier, François M., Robic, LLP
Groia, Joseph, Groia & Company Professional Corporation
Hansell, Carol, Hansell LLP
Hashey, QC, David T., Cox & Palmer
Heintzman, QC, OC, Thomas G., Thomas G. Heintzman
Professional Corporation
Hitchman, Carol V.E., Gardiner Roberts LLP
Hunter, QC, John J.L., Hunter Litigation Chambers
Innes, William I., Rueter Scargall Bennett LLP
Kalichman, Peter, Irving Mitchell Kalichman S.E.N.C.R.L/LLP
Kelly, QC, Ian F., Curtis, Dawe Lawyers
Kenny, QC, William J., Miller Thomson LLP
Killam, QC, G. James, Killam Cordell Murray
Kim, Won J., Kim Orr Barristers P.C.
Kugler, Gordon, Kugler Kandestin, LLP
Lalonde, PC, OC, QC, AdE, Marc, Marc Lalonde - Barrister & Solicitor
Langlois, QC, Raynold, Langlois Kronström Desjardins LLP
Larochelle, Jacques, Jacques Larochelle, Avocat
Lascaris, Dimitri, Siskinds LLP
Lauzon, Yves, Lauzon Bélanger Lespérance inc.
Lebeau, François, Unterberg, Labelle, Lebeau
Leon, Barry, Perley-Robertson, Hill & McDougall LLP/s.r.l.
Lespérance, André, Lauzon Bélanger Lespérance inc.
Linder, QC, Peter T., Peacock Linder & Halt LLP
Lindsay, QC, Richard B., Lindsay LLP
MacDonald, QC, George W., McInnes Cooper
Mack, QC, Perry R., Mack Meagher LLP
MacKenzie, Gavin, Davis LLP
Marshall, John J., John J. Marshall, Q.C. Professional Corporation
McCullogh, QC, Kenneth B., Stewart McKelvey
McDonald, QC, Daniel J., Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer LLP
McElman, CM, QC, Frederick C., Stewart McKelvey
McEwan, QC, J. Kenneth, Hunter Litigation Chambers
McNeil, QC, John S., Genest Murray LLP
Merrick, QC, John P., Merrick Jamieson Sterns
Washington & Mahody Barristers
Miller, QC, David A., Stewart McKelvey
Mitchell, Douglas C., Irving Mitchell Kalichman S.E.N.C.R.L/LLP
Nathanson, QC, David C., Davis LLP
Nathanson, QC, Irwin G., Nathanson, Schachter & Thompson LLP
Oatley, Roger G., Oatley, Vigmond Personal Injury Lawyers LLP
Outhouse, QC, S. Bruce, Blois, Nickerson & Bryson LLP
Peerless, Michael J., McKenzie Lake Lawyers LLP
Percival, QC, Barry A., Benson Percival Brown LLP
Purdy, QC, Robert M., Patterson Law
Ritch, QC, Murray J., Ritch Durnford Lawyers
Ritchie, QC, Scott, Siskinds LLP
Robinson, QC, Christopher C., McInnes Cooper
Rogers, QC, Donald H., Rogers Partners LLP
Rose, QC, James W., Rose LLP
Russell, QC, Bruce S., McInnes Cooper
Ryan, QC, Michael S., Ryan Legal Services
Samworth, Philippa G., Dutton Brock LLP
Santini, Pasquale, Kelly Santini LLP
Schachter, QC, Stephen R., Nathanson, Schachter & Thompson LLP
Smockum, D. Keith, Smockum Zarnett LLP
Stieber, Steven, Stieber Berlach LLP
Strosberg, QC, Harvey T., Sutts, Strosberg LLP
Taylor, Roger E., Couzin Taylor LLP
Tushinski, Paul, Dutton Brock LLP
Wilcox, Peter R., Belmore Neidrauer LLP
Woods, AdE, James A., Woods LLP
Wright, Charles M., Siskinds LLP
Wright, J. Kevin, Davis LLP
Yule, QC, Donald W., Guild Yule LLP
LEXPERT®Ranked Lawyers
moxifl oxacin and the antibacterial use of such compounds.
e Court rejected Cobalt's allegation that this patent lac-
ked utility. e Court agreed with the Applicants' construc-
tion of the "promise" of the patent and held that the patentees
could soundly predict the activity of moxifl oxacin based on
the test results for a similar molecule disclosed in the patent.
e Court further dismissed Cobalt's argument that the 114
Patent was invalid for inadequate disclosure similar to the pa-
tent in the Viagra case (Teva v. Pfi zer, 2012 SCC 60).
e Court also dismissed Cobalt's allegation that the
invention of the 114 Patent was obvious. Neither the choice
of modifying the C-7 position of the quinolone ring nor the
fused pyrrolidine bicycle at the C-7 position were obvious.
CP No. 2,342,211 covers pharmacological compositions
for topically treating ophthalmic infections comprising 0.1 to
1.0 wt per cent moxifl oxacin. Cobalt alleged that the subject
matter of the patent was obvious given the microbiological
data existing at the time and other quinolones had been used
similarly. e Court agreed, rejecting the Applicants' argu-
ments relating to non-obvious properties of the compositions
that were not discussed or focussed upon in the patent.
CP 2,192,418 relates to a crystal form of the drug subs-
tance, moxifl oxacin hydrochloride monohydrate. Since no
crystals exist in Cobalt's ophthalmic solution, the issue was
whether the patent would be infringed during the process to
make the fi nal product. e Court held that the Applicants
failed to show on a balance of probabilities that Cobalt's
process would infringe the 418 Patent.
Neil Belmore, Peter Wilcox and Marian Wolanski of Bel-
more Neidrauer LLP represented the Applicants.
Douglas Deeth, Heather Watts and Cheryl Cheung of
Deeth Williams Wall LLP represented Colbalt.
Zalmanowitz,
QC, Barry
Dentons Canada LLP
(780) 423-7344
barry.zalmanowitz@
dentons.com
Mr. Zalmanowitz's
competition and antitrust
practice includes
representing clients in
criminal and non-criminal
investigations and cases
under the Competition
Act, and advocacy in
appellate courts.
Zych, Kevin J.
Bennett Jones LLP
(416) 777-5738
zychk@bennettjones.com
Mr. Zych focuses on
private loan work-outs
and judicially supervised
restructurings under
the Companies'
Creditors Arrangement
Act and the Canada
Business Corporations
Act, including related
litigation, with an
emphasis on cross-border
restructuring.
Zarnett, Benjamin
Goodmans LLP
(416) 597-4204
bzarnett@goodmans.ca
Mr. Zarnett's litigation
practice has included
high-profi le business
cases including the
litigation over the
proposed privatization
of BCE, the Asset-Backed
Commercial Paper
litigation, Indalex priority
dispute and Nortel asset
allocation dispute.
