Diversified Products Corp. v. Weslo Design International Inc.
T-1153-85
MacKay J.
2/11/92
6 pp.
Motion to reverse order requiring defendant to answer questions on examination for discovery -- Patent infringement action -- Patented invention convertible exercise apparatus designed to permit rowing and other exercises -- Patent held valid in earlier action against Tye-Sil Corp. Ltd. (Diversified Products Corp. et al. v. Tye-Sil Corp. Ltd. (1987), 16 C.P.R. (3d) 207 (F.C.T.D.)) wherein defendant relying on prior knowledge and use of Beacon 3002 rower-exerciser -- Trial Judge holding invention differed from "Beacon 3002" rower-exerciser -- Defendant herein also alleging invalidity based on prior knowledge and use of Beacon 3002 -- Disputed questions relating to whether defendants relying upon same piece of equipment used in Tye-Sil -- Teitelbaum J. already ruling another question as to whether Weslo providing physical evidence to assist Tye-Sil in earlier litigation not required to be answered as immaterial -- Plaintiffs arguing if same physical evidence used in both cases, findings of fact may have probative value -- Appeal allowed -- Trial Judge to determine probative value of findings of fact, depending upon nature of evidence and manner of presentation in second case -- Questions concerning factual matters of evidence in Tye-Sil case irrelevant herein -- Facts found in Tye-Sil significant only in relation to parties and claims between them therein.