Knowledge

Utility in Canadian patent law

Source 📝

28: 551:
To be valid, a patent's usefulness must be established, whether by demonstration or by sound prediction, at the time of the patent application. Any evidence of utility after this date is irrelevant, regardless of when the patent's validity is challenged. Later proof of an invention's inutility can be
547:
A patent is addressed to a person skilled in the art, and any prior art and knowledge that such a person would have can be taken into consideration when the patent is being interpreted by the courts. If a patent's scope is so broad that a person skilled in the art could follow its specifications and
539:
Although utility can be demonstrated by commercial success, it only requires that the invention is directed to a practical use and that it does what is indicated in the patent. The mechanism underlying an invention's function does not need to be disclosed in the patent. If a mechanism is proposed in
580:
The grant of a patent gives the inventor a monopoly in the market for its product. This monopoly is granted in exchange for the disclosure of the invention which can be further developed by society. The requirement that the invention is useful ensures that society receives accurate and complete
543:
An invention is useful if it does what it promises; following the directions should result in the desired effect. The inventor does not have to have created the product of the invention, but the specifications must disclose an actual way to do so.
679: 665: 560:
The utility of an invention can be established by sound prediction where “utility can be predicted in advance of complete testing." This is a question of fact, and there are three prongs to the doctrine:
587:
The basis for the doctrine of sound prediction is the expedited disclosure of inventions. By ensuring that these inventions are not speculation or misinformation, the public domain remains uncluttered.
584:
That a patent does not have to be economically useful is justified by the fact that these kinds of discoveries may lay the foundation for more profitable discoveries.
54: 49: 528: 66: 73: 190: 96: 1037: 981: 568:
The inventor must have an articulable and sound line of reasoning from which the desired result can be inferred from the factual basis.
747: 720: 706: 692: 597: 325: 792: 136: 42: 904: 820: 651: 602: 506: 320: 89: 909: 310: 971: 183: 163: 825: 119: 999: 403: 1032: 480: 176: 154: 846: 841: 785: 1004: 367: 346: 295: 264: 499: 408: 315: 964: 954: 914: 887: 882: 959: 946: 924: 894: 851: 815: 429: 936: 866: 856: 778: 373: 233: 228: 238: 621: 8: 931: 919: 899: 765: 520: 492: 475: 398: 388: 383: 378: 279: 112: 27: 19: 351: 274: 259: 254: 976: 861: 424: 393: 300: 439: 305: 269: 1011: 991: 465: 444: 434: 1026: 801: 470: 223: 540:
the patent but is subsequently disproven, the patent is not invalidated.
449: 330: 770: 218: 736:
Intellectual Property Law: Copyrights, Patents, Trade-Marks
680:
Minerals Separation North American Corp v Noranda Mines Ltd
666:
Burton Parsons Chemicals Inc v Hewlett Packard (Canada) Inc
639:
Intellectual Property Law: Copyrights, Patents, Trade-Marks
548:
not get the useful result, the invention is not useful.
565:There must be a factual basis for the prediction. 1024: 288:Patentability requirements and related concepts 786: 500: 184: 793: 779: 507: 493: 191: 177: 1025: 774: 534: 137:Canadian Intellectual Property Office 749:Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd 722:Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd 708:Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd 694:Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd 669:(1974), 54 DLR (3d) 711, 1 SCR 555. 655:(1981), 59 CPR (2d) 7, FCJ No 1013. 652:X v Canada (Commissioner of Patents) 603:X v Canada (Commissioner of Patents) 598:Apotex Inc v Wellcome Foundation Ltd 738:, 2d ed (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2011). 641:, 2d ed (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2011). 555: 13: 1038:Canadian intellectual property law 311:Inventive step and non-obviousness 14: 1049: 759: 800: 571:There must be proper disclosure. 120:Manual of Patent Office Practice 26: 741: 728: 714: 700: 686: 683:(1952), 15 CPR 133, JCJ No 2. 672: 658: 644: 631: 615: 1: 608: 552:used to invalidate a patent. 575: 360:By region / country 7: 591: 531:, in order to be patented. 10: 1054: 752:, 2002 SCC 77, 4 SCR 153. 725:, 2002 SCC 77, 4 SCR 153. 711:, 2002 SCC 77, 4 SCR 153. 697:, 2002 SCC 77, 4 SCR 153. 417:By specific subject matter 1005:Law School Admission Test 990: 945: 875: 834: 808: 368:Patent Cooperation Treaty 347:Sufficiency of disclosure 326:Person skilled in the art 296:Patentable subject matter 129:Governmental organization 67:Sufficiency of disclosure 43:Patentable subject-matter 905:Immigration and refugees 339:Other legal requirements 316:Industrial applicability 164:Canadian patent case law 625:, RSC 1985, c P-4, s 2. 74:Presumption of validity 895:Civil and human rights 932:Labour and employment 910:Intellectual property 529:novel and non-obvious 523:, inventions must be 97:Defences and remedies 1033:Canadian patent law 826:Provincial statutes 623:Canadian Patent Act 521:Canadian patent law 247:Procedural concepts 155:Canadian patent law 90:Patent infringement 20:Canadian patent law 535:General principles 352:Unity of invention 1020: 1019: 766:What is a Patent? 527:, in addition to 517: 516: 201: 200: 1045: 972:Courts of Appeal 821:Federal statutes 795: 788: 781: 772: 771: 753: 745: 739: 732: 726: 718: 712: 704: 698: 690: 684: 676: 670: 662: 656: 648: 642: 635: 629: 619: 556:Sound prediction 509: 502: 495: 203: 202: 193: 186: 179: 30: 16: 15: 1053: 1052: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1016: 1012:Call to the bar 986: 977:Superior Courts 941: 871: 830: 804: 799: 762: 757: 756: 746: 742: 733: 729: 719: 715: 705: 701: 691: 687: 677: 673: 663: 659: 649: 645: 636: 632: 620: 616: 611: 594: 578: 558: 537: 513: 466:Patent analysis 430:Business method 197: 55:Non-obviousness 12: 11: 5: 1051: 1041: 1040: 1035: 1018: 1017: 1015: 1014: 1009: 1008: 1007: 996: 994: 988: 987: 985: 984: 979: 974: 969: 968: 967: 957: 951: 949: 943: 942: 940: 939: 934: 929: 928: 927: 922: 917: 907: 902: 897: 892: 891: 890: 879: 877: 873: 872: 870: 869: 864: 859: 854: 849: 847:Administrative 844: 842:Constitutional 838: 836: 832: 831: 829: 828: 823: 818: 812: 810: 806: 805: 798: 797: 790: 783: 775: 769: 768: 761: 760:External links 758: 755: 754: 740: 727: 713: 699: 685: 671: 657: 643: 630: 613: 612: 610: 607: 606: 605: 600: 593: 590: 577: 574: 573: 572: 569: 566: 557: 554: 536: 533: 515: 514: 512: 511: 504: 497: 489: 486: 485: 484: 483: 478: 473: 468: 460: 459: 455: 454: 453: 452: 447: 442: 437: 432: 427: 419: 418: 414: 413: 412: 411: 406: 401: 396: 391: 386: 381: 376: 371: 362: 361: 357: 356: 355: 354: 349: 341: 340: 336: 335: 334: 333: 328: 323: 318: 313: 308: 303: 298: 290: 289: 285: 284: 283: 282: 277: 272: 267: 262: 257: 249: 248: 244: 243: 242: 241: 236: 231: 226: 221: 213: 212: 208: 207: 199: 198: 196: 195: 188: 181: 173: 170: 169: 168: 167: 159: 158: 148: 147: 143: 142: 141: 140: 131: 130: 126: 125: 124: 123: 116: 115: 107: 106: 102: 101: 100: 99: 93: 92: 84: 83: 79: 78: 77: 76: 70: 69: 63: 62: 57: 52: 46: 45: 37: 36: 32: 31: 23: 22: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1050: 1039: 1036: 1034: 1031: 1030: 1028: 1013: 1010: 1006: 1003: 1002: 1001: 998: 997: 995: 993: 989: 983: 980: 978: 975: 973: 970: 966: 963: 962: 961: 960:Federal Court 958: 956: 955:Supreme Court 953: 952: 950: 948: 944: 938: 935: 933: 930: 926: 923: 921: 918: 916: 913: 912: 911: 908: 906: 903: 901: 898: 896: 893: 889: 886: 885: 884: 881: 880: 878: 874: 868: 865: 863: 860: 858: 855: 853: 850: 848: 845: 843: 840: 839: 837: 833: 827: 824: 822: 819: 817: 814: 813: 811: 807: 803: 796: 791: 789: 784: 782: 777: 776: 773: 767: 764: 763: 751: 750: 744: 737: 734:David Vaver, 731: 724: 723: 717: 710: 709: 703: 696: 695: 689: 682: 681: 675: 668: 667: 661: 654: 653: 647: 640: 637:David Vaver, 634: 628: 627: 624: 618: 614: 604: 601: 599: 596: 595: 589: 585: 582: 570: 567: 564: 563: 562: 553: 549: 545: 541: 532: 530: 526: 522: 510: 505: 503: 498: 496: 491: 490: 488: 487: 482: 479: 477: 474: 472: 469: 467: 464: 463: 462: 461: 457: 456: 451: 448: 446: 443: 441: 438: 436: 433: 431: 428: 426: 423: 422: 421: 420: 416: 415: 410: 409:United States 407: 405: 402: 400: 397: 395: 392: 390: 387: 385: 382: 380: 377: 375: 372: 369: 366: 365: 364: 363: 359: 358: 353: 350: 348: 345: 344: 343: 342: 338: 337: 332: 329: 327: 324: 322: 319: 317: 314: 312: 309: 307: 304: 302: 299: 297: 294: 293: 292: 291: 287: 286: 281: 278: 276: 273: 271: 268: 266: 263: 261: 258: 256: 253: 252: 251: 250: 246: 245: 240: 237: 235: 232: 230: 227: 225: 222: 220: 217: 216: 215: 214: 210: 209: 205: 204: 194: 189: 187: 182: 180: 175: 174: 172: 171: 166: 165: 161: 160: 157: 156: 152: 151: 150: 149: 145: 144: 138: 135: 134: 133: 132: 128: 127: 121: 118: 117: 114: 111: 110: 109: 108: 104: 103: 98: 95: 94: 91: 88: 87: 86: 85: 81: 80: 75: 72: 71: 68: 65: 64: 61: 58: 56: 53: 51: 48: 47: 44: 41: 40: 39: 38: 35:Patentability 34: 33: 29: 25: 24: 21: 18: 17: 816:Constitution 802:Canadian law 748: 743: 735: 730: 721: 716: 707: 702: 693: 688: 678: 674: 664: 660: 650: 646: 638: 633: 626: 622: 617: 586: 583: 581:disclosure. 579: 559: 550: 546: 542: 538: 524: 518: 471:Pirate Party 301:Inventorship 280:Infringement 224:Patent claim 162: 153: 82:Infringement 59: 876:Other areas 404:Netherlands 260:Prosecution 255:Application 105:Legal texts 1027:Categories 1000:Law school 982:Provincial 888:Indigenous 883:Aboriginal 835:Core areas 609:References 425:Biological 265:Opposition 206:Patent law 146:Categories 113:Patent Act 992:Education 925:Trademark 915:Copyright 576:Rationale 440:Insurance 374:Australia 331:Prior art 275:Licensing 270:Valuation 239:Criticism 234:Economics 211:Overviews 937:Maritime 867:Property 857:Contract 852:Criminal 592:See also 481:Glossary 476:Category 458:See also 445:Software 435:Chemical 809:Sources 394:Germany 321:Utility 306:Novelty 229:History 122:(MOPOP) 60:Utility 50:Novelty 965:Appeal 947:Courts 920:Patent 900:Family 525:useful 389:Europe 379:Canada 219:Patent 139:(CIPO) 399:Japan 384:China 370:(PCT) 862:Tort 519:In 450:Tax 1029:: 794:e 787:t 780:v 508:e 501:t 494:v 192:e 185:t 178:v

Index

Canadian patent law

Patentable subject-matter
Novelty
Non-obviousness
Utility
Sufficiency of disclosure
Presumption of validity
Patent infringement
Defences and remedies
Patent Act
Manual of Patent Office Practice
Canadian Intellectual Property Office
Canadian patent law
Canadian patent case law
v
t
e
Patent
Patent claim
History
Economics
Criticism
Application
Prosecution
Opposition
Valuation
Licensing
Infringement
Patentable subject matter

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.