Search for: "Human Genome Sciences Inc. "
Results 41 - 60
of 125
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Apr 2013, 9:00 pm
Guest Post by Benjamin Jackson, Senior Director of Legal Affairs at Myriad Genetics, Inc. [read post]
17 Apr 2013, 11:50 am
A writ of certiorari was granted by the Supreme Court, which vacated the Court of Appeal's decision, remanding the case for re-evaluation, in light of Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories Inc. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 9:55 pm
Ruth Petran Ecolab, Inc. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 7:50 am
: whether human genes are patentable. [read post]
31 Jan 2013, 7:30 am
According to Human Genome Sciences, the principle patents covering BENLYSTA will generally expire between 2016 and 2023 in the United States and between 2016 and 2021 in the rest of the world. [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 6:46 pm
In a complaint filed October 19, 2012, Biogen Idec MA Inc. joined patent holders such as Exelixis, Inc. and Human Genome Sciences, Inc., who are challenging the USPTO’s interpretation of 35 USC § 154(b)(1)(B)(i)). [read post]
11 Sep 2012, 12:30 am
Meanwhile, over on PatLit, IPKat team blogger Jeremy reflects on the purchase in mid-litigation of patent-owning Human Genome Sciences Inc by Glaxo SmithKline, and on IP Tango Patricia Covarrubia previews a forthcoming seminar in Brazil on IP and sport, as the country prepares itself for the next soccer world cup (2014) and summer Olympics (2016). [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 3:51 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Eli Lilly & Company v Human Genome Sciences, Inc [2012] EWCA Civ 1185 (05 September 2012) Carey -Morgan & Anor v Sloane Stanley Estate [2012] EWCA Civ 1181 (03 September 2012) French v Carter Lemon Camerons LLP [2012] EWCA Civ 1180 (03 September 2012) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) McClaren v News Group Newspapers Ltd. [2012] EWHC 2466 (QB) (05 September 2012) High Court (Administrative Court) Perry v Nursing… [read post]
19 Aug 2012, 10:03 pm
Supply, Inc v. [read post]
6 Aug 2012, 3:44 am
High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Middleton v Allianz Iard SA [2012] EWHC 2287 (QB) (01 August 2012) Petrou v Bertoncello & Ors [2012] EWHC 2286 (QB) (01 August 2012) High Court (Patents Court) Lilly & Company v Human Genome Sciences Inc [2012] EWHC 2290 (Pat) (03 August 2012) Source: www.bailii.org [read post]
31 Jul 2012, 8:24 am
Human Genome Sciences, Inc., C. [read post]
23 Jul 2012, 12:00 am
Myriad Genetics, Inc. [read post]
17 Jun 2012, 3:52 pm
Genome Alberta, Mike Spear Mike Spear is Director of Corporate communications at Genome Alberta. [read post]
5 Jun 2012, 1:00 am
May 25, 2012) and Human Genome Sciences, Inc. v.... [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 9:56 am
Joseph “Chip” Skowron III, a former manager at hedge fund FrontPoint Partners, admitted last year that he directed several FrontPoint healthcare funds to dump shares in biotechnology company Human Genome Sciences Inc. in 2008 based on inside information he obtained about clinical drug trials from a French doctor. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 9:00 am
"Human Genome Sciences Inc., et. al. v. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 7:21 am
In its second intellectual property appeal (the first being Lucasfilm v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39 see my case note "Lucasfilm v Ansoworth The Supreme Court's First IP Appeal" 31 July 2011 IP/IT Update) the United Kingdom Supreme Court had to consider the way in which the requirement of industrial applicability extends to a patent for biological material. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 12:06 pm
Lilly had challenged the validity of the patent of Human Genome Sciences, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland that covers the gene sequence of a protein called Neutrokine-?. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 9:58 am
San Diego - Human Genome Sciences, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company that uses human DNA sequences to develop protein and antibody drugs, recently received a ruling in its favor by the British Supreme Court in a patent dispute with Eli Lilly & Co. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 4:34 am
Eli Lilly & Co v Human Genome Sciences Inc [2011] UKSC 51; [2011] WLR (D) 312 “Since the Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had adopted a consistent approach to patents for biological material, the English courts should follow the principles of law set out in its decisions. [read post]
