×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Smart & BiggarPartner, Toronto; Barrister and Solicitor; Patent and Trademark Agent
Yoon Kang

Yoon Kang

Not yet reviewed

1100-150 York Street, Toronto, ON M5G 2K8

Patents, Litigation, Pharmaceutical and 4 more

About Yoon Kang

Yoon Kang is a lawyer practicing patents, litigation, pharmaceutical and 4 other areas of law. Yoon received a degree from University of Toronto in 1988, and has been licensed for 31 years. Yoon practices at Smart & Biggar in Toronto, ON.

Yoon Kang (Toronto, Ontario)

Reviews for Yoon

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property 1
    • Patents
  • Litigation
  • Other 5
    • Pharmaceutical
    • Life Sciences
    • Chemical & Industrial Biotechnology
    • Life Sciences - Regulatory & Compliance
    • Agricultural Sciences

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Partner, Toronto; Barrister and Solicitor; Patent and Trademark Agent
    Firm Name
    Smart & Biggar
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Experience: Selected Cases: Federal Court of Canada
    Merck Frosst Canada Inc v Canada (Minister of Health), (2000) 8 CPR (4th) 87
    AB Hassle v Canada (Minister of National Health & Welfare), (2000) 10 CPR (4th) 38
    AB Hassle v Rhoxalpharma Inc, 2002 FCT 780
    AB Hassle v Genpharm Inc, 2003 FC 1443
    AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Inc, 2004 FC 71
    Astrazeneca AB v Apotex Inc, 2004 FC 761
    Apotex Inc v Canada (Minister of Health), 2004 FC 650
    Aventis Pharma Inc v Apotex Inc, 2005 FC 1381
    Astrazeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2008 FC 1301
    AB Hassle v Apotex Inc, 2008 FC 184
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2010 FC 714
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Pharmascience Inc, 2012 FC 1189
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals Canada Inc, 2013 FC 232
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2014 FC 638
    Appeals
    Federal Court of Appeal
    Merck Frosst Canada Inc v Canada (Minister of Health), 2001 FCA 192
    AB Hassle v Genpharm Inc, 2004 FCA 413
    AB Hassle v Apotex Inc, 2004 FCA 255
    AB Hassle v Apotex Inc, 2006 FCA 51
    Pharmascience Inc v Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc, 2006 FCA 210
    Apotex Inc v AB Hassle, 2008 FCA 416
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2015 FCA 158
    Supreme Court of Canada
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Canada (Minister of Health), 2006 SCC 49
    AstraZeneca Canada Inc v Apotex Inc, 2016 SCC No 36654, granting leave to appeal from 2015 FCA 158

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1995, Ontario
    1995, Registered Patent Agent
    1995, Registered Trade-mark Agent
    Registered to practise before the United States Patent and Trademark Office
    Memberships

    Professional Involvement

    Memberships
    •fellow, Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
    •Member, International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI)
    •Member and past Co-Chair of the Patents and Industrial Design Committee, Canadian Bar Association

    Bar Fellowship
    Intellectual Property Institute of Canada
    •Member, International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI)
    •Member and Co-Chair of the Patents and Industrial Design Committee, Canadian Bar Association

    Speaking engagements

    •Pharmaceutical Patents, University of Toronto 2012 TIP conference, Toronto, February 2012
    •Manning the Barricades: New Chapter 17 of the MOPOP - CIPO's Policies Concerning the Patentability of Biotechnology-related Inventions, Drug Patent and Legal Forum, Toronto, May 2009
    •Year in Review - Litigation (co-presenters: Gunars A. Gaikis and J. Sheldon Hamilton), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2008, November 2008
    •2007: The Year in Review (co-presenter: Gunars A. Gaikis) and Litigation and Strategies Under thePatented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (co-presenter: J. Sheldon Hamilton), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2007, November 2007
    •Canadian and U.S./Foreign Patent Office Practice (co-presenter: David E. Schwartz), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2006, November 2006
    •Developing and Managing Your Patent Portfolio - Maximizing Patent Life Cycles and Minimizing the Impact of Patent Expiry and Innovation Uncertainty, The Canadian Institute's 5th Annual Forum on Pharma Patents, Toronto, October 2006
    •Drafting and Prosecuting Pharmaceutical Patent Applications, 5th Annual Forum on Drug Patents, March 2006
    •Maximizing Your Pharma Patent Protection, 4th Annual Forum on Pharma Patents, October 2005
    •A Global Perspective of Patent Procurement and Litigation Issues for Biotechnology Inventions, Biotechnology Industry Organization Annual Conference, Philadelphia, PA, June 2005

    Teaching activities

    •Patent Law & Pharmaceuticals: What are the mandated provisions in Canada? The Regulation of Pharmaceuticals, Osgoode Professional Development, Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, Toronto, June 2008
    •Presentation on Intellectual Property: Copyright, Trademark and Patent, University of Toronto Law School, Toronto, January 2008 Fellow: Intellectual Property Institute of Canada

    • Member, Canadian Bar Association

    Speaking engagements

    • "Manning the Barricades: New Chapter 17 of the MOPOP - CIPO's Policies Concerning the Patentability of Biotechnology-related Inventions," Drug Patent and Legal Forum, Toronto, May 2009

    • "Year in Review - Litigation" (co-presenters: Gunars A. Gaikis and J. Sheldon Hamilton), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2008, November 2008

    • "2007: The Year in Review" (co-presenter: Gunars A. Gaikis) and "Litigation and Strategies Under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations" (co-presenter: J. Sheldon Hamilton), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2007, November 2007

    • "Canadian and U.S./Foreign Patent Office Practice" (co-presenter: David E. Schwartz), Smart & Biggar's Pharma Patents 2006, November 2006

    • "Developing and Managing Your Patent Portfolio - Maximizing Patent Life Cycles and Minimizing the Impact of Patent Expiry and Innovation Uncertainty," The Canadian Institute's 5th Annual Forum on Pharma Patents, Toronto, October 2006

    • "Drafting and Prosecuting Pharmaceutical Patent Applications," 5th Annual Forum on Drug Patents, March 2006

    • "Maximizing Your Pharma Patent Protection," 4th Annual Forum on Pharma Patents, October 2005

    • "A Global Perspective of Patent Procurement and Litigation Issues for Biotechnology Inventions," Biotechnology Industry Organization Annual Conference, Philadelphia, PA, June 2005

    Teaching activities

    • "Patent Law & Pharmaceuticals: What are the mandated provisions in Canada?" The Regulation of Pharmaceuticals, Osgoode Professional Development, Osgoode Hall Law School of York University, Toronto, June 2008

    • Presentation on Intellectual Property: Copyright, Trade-mark and Patent, University of Toronto Law School, Toronto, January 2008

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    University of Toronto
    Class of 1993
    LL.B.
    Other Education
    University of Toronto
    Class of 1988
    Microbiology and Genetics

    University of Toronto
    Class of 1988
    B.Sc.

    University of Toronto
    M.Sc.

    University of Toronto
    Molecular Biology and Medical Genetics

    University of Toronto
    1990 thesis titled Homologous recombination between transferred and chromosomal DNA: effects of linearizing the targeting vector at different sites

Yoon Kang

Partner, Toronto; Barrister and Solicitor; Patent and Trademark Agent at Smart & Biggar
Not yet reviewed

1100-150 York StreetToronto, ON M5G 2K8Canada

Email Yoon Kang

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions