IP Update | Scam Warning

Beware of Patent and Trademark Scams

It has come to our attention that there has been a recent uptake in scams targeting patent and trademark owners. Scammers are crafting fake notices to trick people into paying for unnecessary patent and trademark services. Protect your intellectual property by staying alert. How to  Spot a Scam First of all, watch out for urgent notices demanding immediate action or payment. Secondly, verify the sender's identity, as scammers often use fake email addresses. Be cautious if asked for payment or personal information...

IP Law Update | Image of several buildings

A New Era for Industrial Design: Buildings and Structures Now Recognized as Finished Articles

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) recently announced a shift in its practice regarding industrial designs applied to buildings or structures. This change promises notable implications for the field of industrial design. Previous Stance Previously, the Industrial Design Office (the Office) did not allow registration of designs applied to buildings or structures. The Office believed that these were not finished articles. The New Practice However, effective immediately, the Office now recognizes buildings and structures as finished articles. This includes buildings and structures constructed on site....

We've Moved!

Important Update: We’ve Moved to a New Location!

We are pleased to share some exciting news with our valued clients and partners. As of June 3rd, we have relocated to a new office just down the street from our previous location. Our new address is: 11301-5045 Orbitor Drive, Mississauga, ON L4W 4Y4 Canada What Does This Mean for You? Seamless Transition: There will be no disruption to our business operations. Our dedicated team continues to provide the excellent intellectual property services you have come to expect. What Should You Do? Please update...

IP Law Update: More Time

Canada’s Path to Patent Term Adjustment: A Step Forward for Innovators?

On May 18th, 2024, the proposed regulations to enact the patent term adjustment (PTA) system were published for commentary. Understanding Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) The PTA system is a regulatory mechanism designed to compensate patent holders for delays in the patent granting process. When a patent’s issuance is delayed beyond a reasonable timeframe, the PTA system extends the patent’s life, ensuring that innovators do not lose valuable time to commercialize their inventions due to administrative setbacks. Eligibility To be eligible for an additional patent...

IP Update: Image of industrial design schemas

A Shift in Industrial Design Fees

In 2024, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) implemented a significant change to the fee structure for Industrial Design applications.  Along with this fee increase, there has also been a change associated with additional visual representations in an application, marking a departure from the previous page-based fee structure. This article provides a detailed analysis of this specific change. Let’s explore this further. The Old Fee Structure Previously, the fee structure for Industrial Design applications was based on the number of pages. Specifically,...

Header: IP Update; Image: a magnifying glass over a calculator. The word "FEES" is on the calculator screen

Important Update on Patent Maintenance Fees

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) has recently addressed a significant error. This error concerns the second, third and fourth year maintenance fees paid by small entity patent holders. Initially, the fees listed for the second to fourth anniversaries for small entities were listed as $50 and were not in accordance with inflation and the recent fee increase for January 2024.  The current small entity fee is now $56.21. This discrepancy was due to an oversight on behalf of CIPO. Prompt...

IP Decisions: Arc'teryx vs Adidas

Battle of the Brands: A Trademark Showdown in the Sports Industry

In the world of trademarks, a recent case has caught the attention of many. This case involves two major players in the sports industry, Amer Sports Canada Inc. and Adidas Canada Limited. As a Canadian trademark agent, I find this case particularly interesting due to its implications for trademark owners in Canada. The Case Overview Amer Sports Canada Inc., the holder of the “ARC’TERYX” trademark, filed a lawsuit against Adidas Canada Limited. The bone of contention was Adidas’ use of the name...

IP Decisions | Image of the letter AB in bronze

Federal Court Upholds Expungement of AVIREX Trademark for Non-Use

If you are a fan of the classic movie Top Gun, you may be familiar with the AVIREX brand of leather jackets worn by Tom Cruise and other actors. But did you know that the AVIREX trademark was recently expunged in Canada for non-use? Background of the Expungement Case In a recent decision, the Federal Court dismissed an appeal by Centric Brands Holding LLC (Centric), the current owner of the AVIREX trademark, from a decision of the Registrar of Trademarks to expunge...

Ip Update: Patent Box

Enhancing Canadian Innovation: Introducing the Patent Box Regime

In an exciting development for the Canadian innovation landscape, the federal government has announced its intention to explore the implementation of a patent box regime. This strategic move is designed to foster the creation, commercialization, and retention of intellectual property (IP) within Canada. Understanding the Patent Box Regime A patent box regime is a fiscal policy that offers preferential tax treatment for income generated from patented innovations. The aim is to incentivize companies to develop and commercialize their IP domestically, rather than...

IP Decisions: Canada (Attorney General) v. Benjamin Moore & Co. (2023 CAF 168)

Federal Court of Appeal Overturns Federal Court’s Test for Patentable Subject Matter of Computer-Implemented Inventions

In a recent Canadian decision, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) rejected the Federal Court’s (FC) attempt to provide a general test for determining the patentable subject matter of computer-implemented inventions. Specifically, the FCA found that the FC erred in imposing a test that was not based on any binding authority.  The FCA remitted the patent applications at issue to the Commissioner of Patents (CP) for redetermination of patentability to be carried out on an expedited basis, in light of...