David Yi

Associate
Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP


Biography

David Yi is a member of the intellectual property group. He practises in all aspects of intellectual property law with an emphasis on complex patent litigation including patent infringement and validity matters and proceedings under section 6 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations. Mr. Yi has particular expertise in damages matters including actions for patent infringement damages and actions under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations.

Mr. Yi's clients span a variety of industries, including the life sciences and healthcare, and technology spaces. He has experience in matters before the Federal Court, Federal Court of Appeal, and Ontario Superior Court. Mr. Yi's practice also assists clients in navigating matters where antitrust and competition issues intersect with intellectual property disputes.

Before joining us, he completed a clerkship at the Federal Court with the Honourable Mr. Justice Zinn. Prior to that, he was a summer and articling student at a national law firm in Toronto.

Mr. Yi has participated in, and continues to coach law students, in a variety of advocacy competitions, including the Harold G. Fox Intellectual Property Moot. He is a regular volunteer for duty counsel shifts with Pro Bono Law Ontario's legal clinics, an extension of his commitment to improving access to quality pro bono legal services from law school where he was the director of the Pro Bono Students Canada Wills Clinic.


Professional experience

Expand all Collapse all
J.D., University of Toronto, 2012
B.H.Sc.(Hons.), McMaster University, 2009
  • Ontario 2013
  • AI and Drug Discovery, Part 3: Protecting the Value of Data in Collaborations
    • Publication | September 23, 2019 (Part 3) | September 16, 2019 (Part 2) | September 09, 2019 (Part 1)
  • AI and Drug Discovery, Part 2: In-Depth Look at the Mellody Project
    • Publication | September 16, 2019 (Part 2) | September 23, 2019 (Part 3) | September 09, 2019 (Part 1)
  • AI and Drug Discovery, Part 1: Collaborations Between Pharma and AI
    • Publication | September 09, 2019 (Part 1) | September 16, 2019 (Part 2) | September 23, 2019 (Part 3)
  • Derailed on obviousness: Court of Appeal reminds us the characteristics of the skilled worker and common general knowledge are key
    • Publication | August 08, 2019
  • Competition Bureau issues statement regarding off-label use of vaccines
    • Publication | July 29, 2019
  • Competition Bureau publishes final IP enforcement guidelines
    • Publication | March 18, 2019
  • FCA confirms entirety of inventors' conduct is relevant in obviousness analysis and upholds inventiveness of crystal form patent
    • Publication | February 14, 2019
  • FCA Confirms that non-infringing alternative must be legal and objectively economically viable
    • Publication | December 20, 2018
  • Ontario Superior Court rejects Apotex attempts to revive the promise doctrine by dismissing motion for leave to amend, awards substantial indemnity costs
    • Publication | November 18, 2018
  • ONCA permits pleading amendments asserting validity of previously invalidated patent following Nexium decision
    • Publication | November 18, 2018
  • AI and drug development:  The current landscape and IP considerations
    • Publication | May 08, 2018
  • Pharma in Brief – Federal Court dismisses application for a prohibition order regarding prasugrel hydrochloride under the old PM(NOC) Regulations
    • Publication | April 19, 2018
  • ONCA upholds dismissal of summary judgment in lansoprazole s. 8 case
    • Publication | April 19, 2018
  • Change in utility law not a factor in s. 8 damages
    • Publication | April 10, 2018
  • Section 8 liability offset by patent infringement in esomeprazole case
    • Publication | March 27, 2018
  • Ontario Superior Court denies pleading amendments based on Supreme Court of Canada's rejection of promise doctrine in ramipril damages action
    • Publication | February 15, 2018
  • FCA limits scope of Dutch Industries and declines to invalidate patent on the basis of administrative non-compliance with Patent Act in latanoprost s. 8 case
    • Publication | October 12, 2017
  • Apotex disentitled to section 8 recovery on the basis of patent infringement in omeprazole case
    • Publication | September 17, 2017
  • Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismisses motion for summary judgment in lansoprazole section 8 damages action
    • Publication | March 20, 2017
  • Federal Court of Appeal upholds validity infringement of omeprazole formulation patent; finds provincial limitations periods may apply to infringing acts for "Old Act" patents
    • Publication | January 18, 2017
  • Federal Court of Appeal dismisses appeal of prohibition application for mootness
    • Publication | August 11, 2016
  • Supreme Court of Canada refuses leave to appeal the dismissal of a consumer class action based on alleged breaches of the Canadian Patent Regulatory Regime
    • Publication | June 09, 2016
  • Federal Court of Appeal upholds prohibition order relevant date for assessing obvious-type double-patenting is considered
    • Publication | April 26, 2016
  • Federal Court refuses to invalidate issued patent based on deficient fee payment made during prosecution
    • Publication | February 08, 2016
  • Federal Court of Appeal opines that one standard of review should apply to all civil appeals
    • Publication | January 25, 2016
  • Canadian Bar Association
  • Ontario Bar Association
  • Toronto Intellectual Property Group