Search for: "Jones v. Eli Lilly and Company"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Jul 2011, 9:55 am
There are two appeals in the Supreme Court beginning with Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company to be heard on Monday 18 to Wednesday 20 July 2011 by Lords Hope, Walker, Neuberger, Collins and Clarke. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 2:52 am
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 July 2011. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 2:52 am
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 July 2011. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 8:02 am
Biotechnology Patents Under Attack: From Prometheus to Myriad, the Supreme Court's Narrowing View of Patent Eligible Subject Matter Panel: Jim Kelley, Senior Director-Assistant General Patent Counsel, Eli Lilly and Co; Paul Berghoff (Partner, McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff), Prof. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 3:42 am
A. v Kookmin Bank, heard 27 July 2011, and Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 – 21 July 2011. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 9:44 am
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 – 20 July 2011. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Nail v. [read post]
24 Feb 2011, 1:49 pm
The complicated medical terminology necessary to explain the risk/benefit profile of prescription drugs/devices is difficult for ordinary patients to understand.Practical difficulties often preclude drug/device companies from direct communication with patients.But plaintiffs don’t make direct-to-patient warning claims only against drug/device companies. [read post]
29 Sep 2013, 5:30 am
Eli Lilly and Company, 2013 ONSC 5937 http://t.co/4eigHruQKA -> FTC publishes a long list of questions it wants to ask “patent trolls” http://t.co/jCNjFMyKW0 -> Lawsuit alleging Gmail ads are “wiretapping” gets judge’s OK [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 1:25 pm
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: CAFC sets strict standards to establish inequitable conduct: Star Scientific v R J Reynolds Tobacco: (Hal Wegner), (Maryland Intellectual Property Law Blog), (Patent Prospector), (Patent Docs), (Patently-O), (more from Patently-O), (Philip Brooks), (Law360), (I/P Updates), Safe harbour ruling in Io v Veoh could help YouTube in Viacom… [read post]
16 Mar 2008, 10:19 am
Because [Joey] Langston was awarded state contracts by Hood to sue prescription drug-maker Eli Lilly and MCI, Hood said he could not prosecute him. [read post]
