Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
37915
Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited v. SNF Inc.
(Federal) (Civil) (By Leave)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
---|---|---|
2018-06-15 | Close file on Leave | |
2018-06-15 | Copy of formal judgment sent to Registrar of the Court of Appeal and all parties | |
2018-06-15 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
2018-06-14 |
Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A-479-15, 2017 FCA 225, dated November 17, 2017, is dismissed with costs. Dismissed, with costs |
|
2018-05-14 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, for consideration by the Court | |
2018-03-05 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), Form 23B | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
2018-03-05 | Applicant's reply to respondent's argument, (Book Form), Completed on: 2018-03-05 | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
2018-02-22 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), Form 23B | SNF Inc. |
2018-02-22 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), Form 23A | SNF Inc. |
2018-02-22 | Notice of name, (Letter Form) | SNF Inc. |
2018-02-22 | Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), Completed on: 2018-02-22 | SNF Inc. |
2018-01-23 | Letter acknowledging receipt of an incomplete application for leave to appeal, FILE OPENED 2018/01/23 | |
2018-01-16 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23B | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
2018-01-16 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form), 23A | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
2018-01-16 | Notice of name, (Letter Form) | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
2018-01-16 | Application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), amended notice required - Rc'd 2018/01/24, Completed on: 2018-01-25 | Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
Name | Role | Status |
---|---|---|
Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited | Applicant | Active |
v.
Name | Role | Status |
---|---|---|
SNF Inc. | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited
Counsel
Scott Jolliffe
Charlotte McDonald
100 King Street West
Suite 1600
Toronto, Ontario
M5X 1G5
Telephone: (416) 862-4426
FAX: (416) 862-7661
Email: james.buchan@gowlingwlg.com
Agent
2600 - 160 Elgin Street
P.O. Box 466, Stn. A
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 1C3
Telephone: (613) 786-0211
FAX: (613) 788-3573
Email: matthew.estabrooks@gowlingwlg.com
Party: SNF Inc.
Counsel
100 - 340 Gilmour Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0R3
Telephone: (613) 695-8855 Ext: 101
FAX: (613) 695-8580
Email: emeehan@supremeadvocacy.ca
Agent
100- 340 Gilmour Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0R3
Telephone: (613) 695-8855 Ext: 102
FAX: (613) 695-8580
Email: mfmajor@supremeadvocacy.ca
Summary
Keywords
Intellectual property – Patents – Validity – Market competitor challenging validity of applicant’s 581 patent – Does test for assessing non-obviousness in Apotex v. Sanofi-Synthelabo, 2008 SCC 61 under s. 28.3 of current Patent Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-4 still apply? – Should lower courts first attempt to identify a patent’s “inventive concept” when assessing obviousness and, if so, how is this to be performed? – Does body of prior art that may be set up against a patent in obviousness attack, include all information that could be available to public, or alternatively only that prior art that formed part of skilled person’s common general knowledge?
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Ciba Specialty Chemicals Water Treatments Limited (“Ciba”) is the owner of the 581 Canadian Patent for a process used in dealing with waste products created by the operations of the mining industry. The waste product is a water-borne stream of particulate matter, referred to as “slurry”. Mine operators have economic and environmental incentives to recycle this water and to minimize the land area required to dispose of the particulate matter. SNF Inc. (“SNF”) is an American company that manufactures and distributes water soluble polymers and polymer feed equipment used in the processing of slurry. Water can be separated from the particulate matter in a slurry using a paste thickener, a vessel into which slurry is pumped and allowed to stand. The particulate matter settles out leaving a liquid which can be removed and reused. This process can be improved by the use of flocculants. The flocculants used in this case were water-soluble polymers that can accelerate the separation of water from the particulate matter and improve the quality of the recovered water. The 581 patent describes a process that was said to be an improvement on the prior art. It recites that it has been unexpectedly found that the addition of an aqueous solution of polymer to the slurry mixture allows the treated slurry to retain its fluidity while being transferred but to rigidify effectively when it reaches the deposition area. SNF brought an action to challenge the validity of the 581 patent on several grounds, and the patent was declared invalid for obviousness.
Lower court rulings
Federal Court
T-1749-11, 2015 FC 997
Applicant’s 581 patent declared invalid for obviousness
Federal Court of Appeal
A-479-15, 2017 FCA 225
Applicant’s appeal dismissed
Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
Factums on appeal
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available