Ottawa-Based Software Company Faces Patent Infringement Claim From Corporate Rival
As reported by the Ottawa Business Journal, Kinaxis has been named in a patent infringement suit brought by one of their biggest competitors, Blue Yonder. The suit claims that Kinaxis made use of six Blue Yonder patents in the design of its supply-chain technology.
Both Kinaxis and Blue Yonder operate in the supply-chain software development market, and generate significant profits by licensing the use of their software to large corporations seeking to streamline their operations. A news release from Blue Yonder asserted that the similarity of the two companies’ products is more than coincidence. Blue Yonder claims that their patented solutions were used by Kinaxis to “circumvent the development process and investment necessary to develop new products”.
The suit comes at a time when Kinaxis is experiencing significant growth. The Ottawa company’s client base already includes Ford, Nissan, and Proctor and Gamble, and revenues for this fiscal year are projected to grow by $192 million. In a statement, the company confirmed their intentions to “vigorously defend against the claims made by Blue Yonder and consider all appropriate responses and avenues of legal recourse.”
Blue Yonder, however, is no small competition for Kinaxis. Best Buy, Coca-Cola, and Home Depot are just a few of the 3,300 businesses using Blue Yonder software. To attract such large customers, Blue Yonder claims to have invested more than US$1 billion in research and development over the last ten years, which has reportedly lead to more than 400 patents either granted in their favour or currently pending. The company’s chief legal and administrative officer reportedly stated that they have already amassed an “unrivaled patent portfolio in the area of supply chain technology”, and that they will seek to defend and uphold their intellectual property in a manner that ensures no service interruption for their customers.
Author: Sasha Seeber
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@arnosenoner
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…