Search for: "C Lillie"
Results 101 - 120
of 441
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Feb 2018, 4:16 am
In C-493/12 – Eli Lilly and Company the CJEU had stressed that the “infringement test” was not to be applied for determining whether a product is “protected by a basic patent in force”. [read post]
31 Jan 2018, 10:05 pm
Article 3(a): a spectrum of specificity The Court of Appeal reviewed the case law of the CJEU and pending references, focussing on Case C-322/10 Medeva BV v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks and Case C-493/12 Eli Lilly & Co Ltd v Human Genome Sciences Inc. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The UCL debate on the UK Supreme Court decision Actavis v Eli Lilly ("Equivalents: K = Na. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 11:35 am
Big pharma players such as Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Allergan are committed to voluntary price restraints, while companies such as Novartis and Roche are in favor of value-based pricing. [read post]
24 Nov 2017, 7:07 am
Brian CorderyFew would dispute that the Actavis v Eli Lilly decision from the Supreme Court in July 2017 represented – for better or for worse – a major change to the scope of protection of patents in the UK. [read post]
23 Nov 2017, 12:13 am
Sir Robin used the example of Gilead Hepatitis C drug, which costs £70,000 when it was introduced. [read post]
9 Nov 2017, 9:04 am
Eric Sutton is a senior patent counsel at Oracle and an adjunct professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law. [read post]
28 Oct 2017, 8:57 am
Citing CJEU case law (C-322/10 ”Medeva” and C-493/12 ”Eli Lilly”) as well as the DKPTO Guide Lines on SPCs – which state that a combination product consisting in the two active ingredients A and B are considered as protected, when A and B are stated in a patent claim – the Court concluded that ”Emtricitabin does not appear in the wording of claim 27, just as emtricitabin is not described by way of chemical name or structural… [read post]
4 Oct 2017, 6:00 am
Contents include:Anthony C. [read post]
27 Sep 2017, 3:29 am
The UK judgment considered whether the Actavis generic pemetrexed products, which used (a) pemetrexed diacid, (b) pemetrexed ditromethamine, or (c) pemetrexed dipotassium, directly infringed the UK, Italian, Spanish or French designations of the patent claims, which specify pemetrexed disodium. [read post]
16 Sep 2017, 9:46 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 119 F.3d 1559, 1575 (Fed. [read post]
12 Sep 2017, 4:00 am
A motion for sanctions for frivolous conduct (see 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]) is not the same as a cause of action for attorney misconduct (see Judiciary Law § 487). [read post]
20 Aug 2017, 9:00 pm
Actavis avait saisi les juridictions britanniques en déclaration de non contrefaçon au Royaume Uni, en France, en Italie et en Espagne, du brevet EP1313508 détenu par Eli Lilly. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 3:41 pm
UK Supreme Court moves towards a UK Doctrine of Equivalents in Lilly pemetrexed battle? [read post]
10 Jul 2017, 1:00 am
R v M; R v C; R v T, heard 19 Jun 2017. [read post]
3 Jul 2017, 1:00 am
R v M; R v C; R v T, heard 19 Jun 2017. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 1:00 am
R v M; R v C; R v T, heard 19 Jun 2017. [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:00 am
Eli Lilly & Co v Actavis UK Ltd & Ors, heard 4-6 Apr 2017. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 12:50 pm
Regulating rishvat in early colonial India”· Elizabeth Lhost, University of Chicago, “Philatelic Fraud and the Materiality of Law: Policing stamped paper in British India”· Mitra Sharafi, University of Wisconsin-Madison, “Corruption and Forensic Experts in late colonial India· Simanti Dasgupta, University of… [read post]
12 Jun 2017, 6:00 am
Eli Lilly & Co v Actavis UK Ltd & Ors, heard 4-6 Apr 2017. [read post]
