Andrew Brodkin

Andrew’s recent representative work includes:

• Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2024 FCA 72 – Successfully represented Apotex in an appeal affirming a Judgment finding invalidity of patent in suit. 
• Steelhead v. ARC Resources, 2024 FCA 67 – Successfully represented four defendants in an appeal affirming a Judgment finding non-infringement of Steelhead patent.
• Steelhead v. ARC Resources, 2023 FC 1684 – Successfully represented four defendants invalidating claims of patent relating to a Floating Liquefied Natural Gas Facility. 
• AbbVie Corporation v. JAMP Pharma Corporation, 2023 FC 1520 - Successfully opposed action for permanent injunction in respect of six asserted patents.
• Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2023 FCA 125 – Successfully represented Apotex in an appeal affirming a Judgment declaring Lilly’s tadalafil patent to be invalid. 
• Energizer Brands v. Gillette Company, 2023 FC 804 – Successfully represented Gillette, Procter & Gamble and Duracell in respect alleged violations of the Trademarks Act.
• Nova Chemicals v. Dow Chemical Company, 2022 SCC 43 – Acted on behalf Canadian Generic Pharmaceutical Association as an intervener in respect of principles relevant to an accounting of profits. 
• AbbVie Corporation v. JAMP Pharma Corporation, 2022 FC 1209 – Successfully represented JAMP in a judicial review application resulting in JAMP retaining its Notice of Compliance for its adalimumab product.
• Janssen v. Apotex, 2022 FCA 184 – Successfully represented Apotex in an appeal affirming a Judgment declaring Janssen’s abiraterone patent to be invalid. 
• GEMAK Trust v. Jempak Corporation, 2022 FCA 141 – Retained as appellate counsel, resulting in a successful appeal overturning a Judgment dismissing an action for patent infringement. 
• Google v. Sonos, 2022 FC 1116 – Represented Google in a two week trial in connection with audio technology. 
• Steelhead v. ARC Resources, 2022 FC 998 – Represented four defendants in a successful summary trial dismissing an action for alleged patent infringement.
• Janssen v. Apotex, 2021 FC 3 – Five week trial resulting in the successful opposition of an action for an Order prohibiting Apotex from receiving a Notice of Compliance for abiraterone acetate and a declaration of invalidity of patent in suit.
• Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2020 FC 816 – Four week trial resulting in the successful defence of action for patent infringement and a declaration of invalidity of the patent in suit.
• Eli Lilly v. Apotex, 2020 FC 814 – Three week trial resulting in the successful defence of action for patent infringement and a declaration of non-infringement and invalidity of the patent in suit.
• Evolution Technologies v. Human Care Canada, 2019 FCA 209 – Retained as appellate counsel, resulting in a successful appeal overturning a Judgment finding patent infringement.
• Les Laboratories Servier v. Apotex , 2019 FC 616 – successful opposition of an application for an Order prohibiting Apotex from receiving a notice of compliance for perindopril products
• Evolution Technologies v. Human Care Canada, 2019 FCA 11 – retained after a client was found to have infringed a patent and ordered to pay damages and successfully applied to the Federal Court of Appeal to stay the trial judgment pending the outcome of an appeal
• Eli Lilly Canada v Apotex, 2018 FC 736 - successful opposition of an application for an Order prohibiting Apotex from receiving a notice of compliance for prasugrel products
• Bristol-Myers Squibb Canada v Apotex Inc., 2017 FC 1061 - successful opposition of an application for an Order prohibiting Apotex from receiving a notice of compliance for aripiprazole products