In an independent review from clients, Chambers Global had this to say about Brian: “Brian Gray is considered the best …for pure IP work, whether contentious or non-contentious. Clients say he is ‘diligent, knowledgeable, responsible and reasonable in terms of what needs to be done and portioning out the work so the rates remain viable.”

Chambers Global, in a second independent review from clients, had this to say about Brian: “Brian ‘can perform miracles’ according to his clients. As well as being ‘a pleasure to work with,’ he can deal with situations where ‘there are no real precedents’. As one client remarked, ‘ we cannot afford to take risks- we need a lawyer who can provide an analysis of which way the law is going and who can foresee how the courts might respond-and that’s precisely what Gray does.”


Benjamin Moore Case

Tuesday, August 15, 2023

On July 26, 2023, the Federal Court of Appeal decided the Benjamin Moore decision relating to computer implemented inventions. Please read my full comments in the Articles section of this website. I represented the Canadian Life and Health insurance Asssociation and Insurance Bureau of Canada as Intervener in the appeal.


Fordham 2023

Friday, April 14, 2023

At the 30th Annual Intellectual Property Law Conference at Fordham I participated in a panel on "Plausibility, Enablement & Written Description with Speakers Carl Josefsson, Ute Kilger, John Richards and Amit H. Thakore and fellow panelists Trevor Cook and Laura Whiting, moderated by Brian Cordery..

Business Method Patents- Court of Appeal

Thursday, February 16, 2023

I intervened in the Federal Court of Appeal in the case of Benjamin Morre v. The Attorney General of Canada. I argued on behalf of The Canadian Health and LIfe Insurance Association and Insurance Bureau of Canada. The case concerned a new test that had been advanced by the Intelectual Property Institute in Canada and adopted by the trial division.  If confirmed, this new test would considerably expand the patenting of business methods and remove restrictions on such patents such as those that exist in other countries such as the US and the EU.


Related Articles

Why Choueifaty is wrong

  • Posted on: 25 April 2022
  • By: BWG

In 2020, the Federal Court of Canada decided an important case on subject matter eligibility of computer implemented inventions: Choueifaty v. Attorney General of Canada 2020FC 837. Briefly I explain why the decision in Choueifaty is at least analytically wrong, although I take no position, at this time, as to whether the case was correctly decided as to subject matter eligibility, only that it was decided for the wrong reasons.