«Given that
the previous Federal Court decision raised complex legal issues it was prudent for Canada to obtain a decision from a higher court.»
Not exact matches
The factors considered, arising from
previous decision of the
Federal Court, are: presence of competing products in the market; advantages of the patented product over competing products; advantages of the infringing product over the patented product; market position of the patentee; market position of the infringer; market share of the patentee before and after the infringing product entered the market; size of the market before and after the infringing product entered the market; and capacity of the patentee to produce additional products.
The German patent office will most likely treat the
Federal Patent
Court's opinion on the photo gallery patent as binding case law for the purposes of the utility model revocation proceedings; if not, Apple can always ask the
Federal Patent
Court to review the
decision, and a panel presumably consisting of partly the same people would probably affirm the
previous decision in the new context.
The
Federal Court overturned a
previous decision by the Commissioner of Patents confirming the analysis of the Patent Appeal Board reviewing the final rejection issued by the Examiner in charge, and stated that Amazon.com's patent application constitutes statutory subject matter in accordance with the Patent Act.
The
Federal Court of Canada has just issued a
decision in Girao v. Zarek Taylor Grossman Hanrahan LLP, 2011 FC 1070 (CanLII), in which it found a law firm liable for having posted on its website a
previous report of findings from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada along with a cover letter that identified the complainant.
The question had been resolved by a
previous decision of the
Federal Court of Appeal.
Following our
previous Slaw post, where we commented that the
Federal Government decided to appeal the June 15 British Columbia Supreme
Court ruling that struck down the Criminal Code ban on physician - assisted suicide, and seeking to stay all aspect of the
decision, including the exemption order found in the ruling.
The Supreme
Court of Canada has concluded that the acquisition of a hazardous waste site in northeastern British Columbia should be permitted to go ahead, overruling
previous decisions by the
Federal Court of Appeal and the Competition Tribunal.
This interpretation recognises what
previous High
Court and
Federal Court decisions have also recognised — that the connection that Indigenous people have with country is essentially a spiritual one.14 For instance, in Milirrpum v Nabalco Justice Blackburn referred to the fact that: 15
*** does not include Wanjina: Wungurr - Willinggin - Ngarinyin
Federal Court litigated
decision handed down 8th December 2003 nor the Miriuwung Gajerrong FC consent determination of 9th December 2003 although the
previous Miriuwung Gajerrong litigated
decision that native title exists is included.
Since there were no
previous Vermont cases on this issue, the Vermont Supreme
Court looked to
Federal Trade Commission
decisions and cases from other states with similar consumer protection laws.
In litigating to hold Clean Water Act regulators accountable to the
courts for their
decisions about whether private property is subject to strict
federal regulation, this case follows up on PLF's
previous Sackett v. EPA
decision.