Inadequate Disclosure Stops Snowmobile Patent In Its Tracks: Bombardier Recreational Products Inc v Arctic Cat Inc

On February 24, 2017, in Bombardier Recreational Products Inc v Arctic Cat Inc, 2017 FC 207, the Federal Court found that no valid claims were infringed, and dismissed the infringement action against Arctic Cat Inc with costs.  Three of the four patents at issue would have been infringed but were invalid.

One patent, related to a frame assembly, was found not infringed.  The other three patents related to new configurations for a snowmobile, bringing the rider to a more forward position when sitting on the snowmobile (Rider Patents).  The Court found that all the 378 models of Arctic Cat snowmobiles fell within the scope of at least some of the Rider Patents’ claims. However, the Court found the infringed Rider Patents’ claims to be invalid for failing to have an adequate disclosure. 

In reaching its decision the Court noted that the subject matter of the Rider Patents was inventive.  However, the Court concluded that the weight of the evidence favoured the proposition that the disclosure did not tell the skilled person how to reconfigure the snowmobile to achieve the more forward position, or even what that reconfiguration may be.  Accordingly, the Court found the Rider Patents invalid as the disclosure was inadequate.

Commentary regarding this case, by Professor Norman Siebrasse, is available here.

Summary By: Robert Dewald