Search for: "Apotex" Results 241 - 260 of 1,051
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
26 Feb 2007, 9:34 pm
  Apotex may have filed its new complaint hoping that the Supreme Court's recent decision in MedImmune v. [read post]
25 Aug 2008, 3:46 am
Apotex Inc. et al.1:08-cv-22308; filed August 18, 2008 in the Southern District of Florida Infringement of U.S. [read post]
2 Sep 2008, 12:39 am
Apotex, Inc. et al.3:08-cv-04320; filed August 27, 2008 in the District Court of Delaware Infringement of U.S. [read post]
5 Jul 2016, 11:16 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Apotex ’s proposed inference from (9)(B) would implicitly make (8)(A) neither mandatory nor standalone, despite (8)(A)’s language, and would reintroduce the very problems of rushed litigation —over patents the applicant is empowered to prevent being litigated earlier—that (8)(A) was enacted to avoid.The inference that Congress rendered unavailable direct injunctive enforcement of (8)(A)’s plain terms is unwarranted. [read post]
20 Dec 2010, 9:55 pm by Patent Docs
The case involved two challenges filed by the appellants, Apotex... [read post]
8 Jun 2012, 9:19 pm by Patent Docs
Apotex for Pharma Patents" on July 12, 2012 from 1:00 - 2:30 pm (EDT). [read post]
9 Sep 2008, 1:28 am
Apotex Corp., Apotex and Impax; 07-1414, -1416, -1458, -1459). [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 5:32 am by Mark Summerfield
Apotex Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB [2011] FCA 1520 (14 December 2011) Interlocutory injunctions – prima facie case – balance of convenience – relevance of delay by patentee, complexity of proceedings, and parties’ conduct and obligations In the first Federal Court decision to follow the ruling of the Full Court in Samsung v Apple (see Samsung v Apple – A Closer Look at the Appeal Decision) Justice Rares has granted a preliminary injunction to pharmaceutical… [read post]