Changing the firm’s name from Odutola & Co. to OLLIP P.C. reflects the shift in the scope and growth over a 15 year period from one professional to a well regarded group of intellectual property lawyers, litigators and trade-mark agents.

The firm’s URL www.odutola.com will be redirected to www.ollip.com. As well all emails will be redirected to firstname.lastname@ollip.com. The firm’s address, telephone and facsimile numbers will remain the same.

The changes address the Committee’s concerns on the current judicial interpretation of the summary judgment rule which makes it unlikely that a motion for summary judgment will be granted if there are conflicts in the evidence and the case turns on the drawing of inferences, or if an issue of credibility arises. 

The rules on summary judgment will be amended to create a summary trial proceeding. This is in addition to motions for summary judgment. The Court can then determine an issue or action by way of summary trial when it becomes clear, in the course of adjudicating a motion for summary judgment, that there is conflicting evidence or that issues of credibility exist which would otherwise require a full trial.

For the full text of the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement and proposed amendments see:

http://gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2009/2009-01-24/html/reg1-eng.html

The changes to the new practice notice include:

• Simplifying and clarifying the Registrar’s benchmarks for granting extensions of time.
• Providing guidance with respect to the granting of extensions of time in exceptional circumstances.
• Encouraging parties to pursue settlement and mediation early in the opposition proceeding.
• Introducing a new practice of granting extensions of time amounting to a cooling-off period for parties to pursue settlement and mediation. In particular, the new practice notice will allow the opponent to request one extension of time up to a maximum benchmark of nine (9) months on consent either prior to filing its statement of opposition or its Rule 41(1) evidence with the possibility for the applicant to also request one further extension of time up to a maximum benchmark of nine (9) months on consent either prior to filing its counter statement or its Rule 42(1) evidence.
• Introducing a new practice with respect to the scheduling of hearings.

 For the full text of the new Practice Notice see:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/wr01558.html
 

• Modernise, streamline and more fully clarify and identify the Registrar’s practice in section 45 proceedings, including as it relates to the issuance of section 45 notices, filing of evidence and the scheduling of oral hearings.
• Introduce a new practice whereby the Registrar may, in limited cases, issue a final decision to maintain, amend, or expunge the registration based solely on the evidence filed by the registered owner and without hearing representations from the registered owner or the requesting party.
• Amend the practice with respect to the granting of extensions of time under section 47 of the Act with the intent of streamlining the process to better reflect the legislative intent of the summary nature of section 45 proceedings. Accordingly, the Registrar proposes to amend the practice and generally only grant one extension of time up to 4 months for a registered owner to file evidence.
• Clarify the administrative deadlines set by the Registrar and the inapplicability of section 47 of the Act and amend the practice to generally refuse to grant routine extensions of administrative deadlines for parties to file written arguments and request hearings.

For the full text of the new Opposition Board Practice Notice see:
http://www.cipo.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/cipointernet-internetopic.nsf/eng/wr01558.html