Search for: "Akorn Inc." Results 41 - 54 of 54
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
17 Jan 2020, 6:52 am by John Jascob
As is typically the case, the agreement did not define what is "material" for purposes of a material adverse effect, so the court turned to Delaware cases holding that the effect should "substantially threaten the overall earnings potential of the target in a durationally significant manner" (Akorn, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Apr 2012, 3:53 pm by FDABlog HPM
  FDA also states in the petition response that the Agency approved three ANDAs for generic VANCOCIN, including one from Akorn, Inc. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 10:54 pm by Doug Cornelius
ColosimoThe CLS Blue Sky Blog Channel Medsystems, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 9:19 am by Steve Hall
  Finally last December Lundbeck sold its pentobarbital rights to Illinois-based Akorn Inc., which signed an agreement promising it would not sell the drug for the purpose of executions. [read post]
6 Apr 2019, 11:18 pm by Kirk Jenkins
  The Delaware Court of Chancery briefly cited the Restatement in a lengthy footnote in Akorn, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2019, 11:18 pm by Kirk Jenkins
  The Delaware Court of Chancery briefly cited the Restatement in a lengthy footnote in Akorn, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Apr 2019, 11:18 pm by Kirk Jenkins
  The Delaware Court of Chancery briefly cited the Restatement in a lengthy footnote in Akorn, Inc. v. [read post]
23 May 2022, 10:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
Similarly, as discussed here, in 2019 a Illinois federal judge revoked a $322,000 attorneys’ fees to be paid to the plaintiffs’ lawyers in connection with a separate lawsuit (also filed by the Monteverde law firm) in connection with Akorn, Inc’s planned merger with Fresnius Kabi AG. [read post]
2 Sep 2019, 12:59 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Durkin, exercising his “inherent authority” and acting at the urging of an objecting shareholder, has “abrogated” the settlement of the litigation arising out of the acquisition of Akorn , Inc. by Frensenius Kabi AG, and ordered the plaintiffs’ lawyers to return to Akorn their $322,000  mootness fee, ruling that the additional disclosures to which the company agreed were “worthless to shareholders” and that the underlying… [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 2:52 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court’s March 2018 entry of its opinion in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2020, 2:52 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court’s March 2018 entry of its opinion in Cyan, Inc. v. [read post]