Search for: "CIPLA"
Results 1 - 20
of 202
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Feb 2009, 2:37 am
" Last year we hinted that Cipla may possibly target patented drugs, mostly tyrosine kinase inhibitors. [read post]
20 Apr 2008, 10:28 pm
Some of you may be following a recent patent controversy involving Roche, a multinational pharma company and CIPLA, a generic manufacturer from India. [read post]
25 Sep 2008, 10:47 am
This is the second instance of Cipla mocking Indian patent after it deliberately launched generic copy of Roche patented anti-cancer drug Erlotinib. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 5:51 pm
The post Burying 2(a) at the CIPLA appeared first on LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION™. [read post]
30 Apr 2009, 1:50 pm
After the single judge rejected Roche’s appeal for temporary injunction against Cipla, Roche appealed the single judge decision. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 3:38 pm
Just note this overcharging is for generic drugs what if Cipla start marketing and pricing patented drugs. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 9:04 am
Cipla filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application ("ANDA") with the U.S. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 7:06 am
Cipla and Richter Gedeon were contesting the latter's patent IN206098 (for contraceptive drug Levonorgestrel) at the Mumbai patent office in a post grant opposition proceeding. [read post]
30 Sep 2008, 3:00 am
In parallel, Roche is also facing post-grant oppositions from Ranbaxy, Cipla and the Delhi Network of Positive People in the Chennai Patent Office. [read post]
24 Mar 2010, 11:20 pm
Bayer and Cipla are fighting a pitched battle on the aspect of linkage of patents with drug approval [regulatory approval] in context of Sorafenib Tosylate [anti cancer drug- Nexavar (R)]. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 1:33 pm
In another post-grant opposition decided earlier this month, the Mumbai Patent Office revoked Indian Patent Number 202297 issued to Richter Gedon protecting emergency contraceptive pill containing 1.5mg Levonorgestrel, the active ingredient of Cipla’s money spinner i-pill (recently sold to Piramal Healthcare) and Mankind’s Unwanted 72. [read post]
2 Jun 2012, 12:50 pm
Cipla, Ltd., 2012 U.S. [read post]
19 Aug 2010, 1:33 pm
In another post-grant opposition decided earlier this month, the Mumbai Patent Office revoked Indian Patent Number 202297 issued to Richter Gedon protecting emergency contraceptive pill containing 1.5mg Levonorgestrel, the active ingredient of Cipla’s money spinner i-pill (recently sold to Piramal Healthcare) and Mankind’s Unwanted 72. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 10:47 am
Cipla Ltd., the Federal Circuit recently reviewed an appeal from the Middle District of Georgia that found defendant Cipla (an Indian company) in contempt for violating an earlier injunction and finding co-defendant Velcera in contempt for acting in concert with Cipla to violate that injunction. [read post]
3 Apr 2010, 7:44 am
Lately Cipla sold its money-spinning contraceptive brand product “i-pill” to Piramal Healthcare for INR. 95 crores. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 1:11 am
Cipla (Sorafenib) litigation.I recommend reading their post, here.Our old posts on Sorafenib, here. [read post]
16 May 2007, 6:06 am
The dinner meeting will be held at the Graduate Club in New Haven, from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM.As an aside, I can't resist commenting on the fact that the CIPLA has wisely included the term "intellectual property" in its name. [read post]
27 Apr 2009, 1:47 am
[Download] the Delhi High Court decision rejecting Roche appeal against the Delhi HC judgment dated March 19, 2008 declining their appeal for grant of an interim injunction to restrain the Cipla from manufacturing, offering for sale, selling and exporting the drug Erlotinib. [read post]
19 Jan 2010, 2:14 pm
Press Trust of India (PTI) reported that Global Biopharma major UCB Farchim yesterday approached the Delhi High Court against the Indian generic manufacturer Cipla and the Indian Patent office over rejection of its patent for a new anti-allergic drug. [read post]
31 May 2012, 11:30 am
Cipla, the majority stated we conclude that (1) the 2008 default judg- ment against Cipla rested on a valid exercise of personal jurisdiction; (2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to stay the contempt proceedings in view of the then-pending Delaware action; (3) the district court did not clearly err in determining that PetArmor Plus infringes the ’329 patent and is not more than colorably different from Cipla’s previously enjoined… [read post]
