MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990037294 · doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpq218

Methods of medical treatment still unpatentable in Canada

2011· article· en· W1990037294 on OpenAlex
Emir Crowne

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPharmaceutical Economics and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoticePatentabilityAllegationRespondentLawBusinessEstoppelPatent infringementFormularyPolitical scienceLaw and economicsPatent lawMedicineIntellectual propertyFamily medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In proceedings brought under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations, Janssen sought an order prohibiting the Minister of Health from issuing a notice of compliance to Mylan for its generic galantamine product until the expiry of Janssen's patent. These summary proceedings, brought by an innovator drug company, are a form of judicial review against the Minister of Health to determine whether the notice of compliance should issue, thereby allowing the generic drug company to produce the generic and enter the marketplace. However, it is not an action for patent infringement, nor does it bar any future claims of infringement. As is common practice in such proceedings, Mylan served a notice of allegation challenging the validity of Janssen's patent on the grounds of obviousness, insufficient disclosure, non-utility, ambiguity and non-patentability as a method of medical treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.211
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.145 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it