Search for: "Merck Sharp & Dohme LTD"
Results 1 - 20
of 61
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Oct 2020, 6:34 pm
Electron Microscope Image of Human BloodPhotographers: Bruce Wetzel and Harry SchaeferJane LambertPatents Court (Mr Justice Meade) Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd v Wyeth LLC [2020] EWHC 2636 (Pat) (15 Oct 2020) This was an action by Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd ("MSD") for the revocation of European Patent (UK) 2,676,679 for formulations which stabilize and inhibit precipitation of immunogenic compositions [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 9:01 pm
The Four Courts, Dublin Author Jtdirl Released into public domain by the copyright owner Source Wikipedia Supreme Court of Ireland Jane Lambert Irish Supreme Court (Chief Justice Clarke and Justices O'Donnel Donal, McKechnie, Dunne, O'Malley and Iseult) Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Clonmel Healthcare Ltd. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 8:08 am
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Apotex Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 928 (31 August 2012) Interlocutory injunctions – prima facie case – balance of convenience – permanent impact of generic competition upon market for pharmaceutical products The Federal Court of Australia (Justice Jagot) has issued a preliminary injunction barring generic pharmaceutical manufacturer from marketing and selling nasal sprays containing the corticosteroid mometasone furoate… [read post]
9 Apr 2011, 9:07 am
The IPKat has had his attention directed to the decision in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Teva UK Ltd, [2011] EWCA Civ 382, a ruling of the Court of Appeal for England and Wales (Sir Andrew Morrit, The Chancellor of the High Court, providing a judgment with which Richards and Patten LJJ agreed) handed down yesterday.To summarise: Teva had applied for revocation of Merck’s European Patent (EP(UK) 0509752), relating to “ophthalmic compositions… [read post]
17 Jan 2016, 8:19 pm
Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 11:40 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) MA v Merck Sharp & DOHME Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1426 (16 December 2008) Animatrix Ltd & Ors v O’Kelly [2008] EWCA Civ 1415 (16 December 2008) Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1427 (16 December 2008) Allan v Johnson Controls Automative (UK) Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1377 (16 December 2008) Smith [...] [read post]
8 Dec 2020, 1:00 pm
[1] Complaint at 1-2, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. [read post]
6 Jun 2013, 9:59 pm
Merck Canada Inc and Merck Sharp & Dohme Ltd v Sigma Pharmaceuticals plc Prior to their accession to the European Patent Convention, several states did not allow patent protection for pharmaceutical products. [read post]
23 Jun 2015, 8:52 pm
• Defendants: Merck & Co., Inc.; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.; N.V. [read post]
17 Oct 2021, 9:24 pm
Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 643, and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v Sandoz Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 947. [read post]
5 Aug 2013, 9:59 pm
The UK High Court recently gave its judgment in the case of Merck, Sharp & Dohme Corp. and Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Ltd (collectively referred to in the judgement as BMS) v Teva Pharma B.V. and Teva UK Ltd (Teva) (decision). [read post]
30 Aug 2015, 9:53 pm
Squibb & Sons, L.L.C.; Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.; Tasuku Honjo • Defendants: Merck & Co., Inc.; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 1:19 pm
The Inn Sign for the Beehive public house in Grantham Photo Wikipedia The Lincolnshire town of Grantham educated one of the world's greatest scientists and the first woman ti be British prime minister (see "Frit" - Merck Sharp Dohme Corp v Teva Pharma BV 25 March 2012). [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 2:45 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Teva UK Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 382 (08 April 2011) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria [2011] EWHC 876 (QB) (08 April 2011) The Legal Services Commission v F & Ors [2011] EWHC 899 (QB) (08 April 2011) High Court (Chancery Division) Moria & Anor v Bednash [2011] EWHC 839 (Ch) (08 April 2011) Batt v Royal Mail [2011] EWHC 900 (Ch) (08 April 2011) High… [read post]
10 Apr 2011, 1:43 am
In my article "Divided by a common language: US and UK patent law" which was published in Science, People & Politics (April to June 2011) I noted that one of the differences between US and UK patent law was that 35 USC 102 (b) of the US act permits an application for a US patent even where the invention has been described in a publication or application for a foreign patent that has been made in [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 12:08 am
Guest post by Professor Yeo Tiong Min, SC (honoris causa), Yong Pung How Chair Professor of Law, Yong Pung How School of Law, Singapore Management University Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp (formerly known as Merck & Co, Inc) v Merck KGaA (formerly known as E Merck) [2021] 1 SLR 1102, [2021] SGCA 14 (“Merck”), noted previously, is a landmark case in Singapore private international law, being a decision of a full bench of the… [read post]
Foreign Judgments: The Limits of Transnational Issue Estoppel, Reciprocity, and Transnational Comity
26 May 2021, 8:40 pm
Written by Professor Yeo Tiong Min, SC (honoris causa), Yong Pung How Chair Professor of Law, Yong Pung How School of Law, Singapore Management University In Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Merck KGaA [2021] SGCA 14, a full bench of the Singapore Court of Appeal addressed the limits of transnational issue estoppel in Singapore law, and flagged possible fundamental changes to the common law on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in Singapore. [read post]
11 Oct 2018, 12:57 am
Eszter SzakácsCo-author: Zsolt Lengyel, Danubia Patent and Law Office Just a few months before the CJEU’s judgment in C-121/17 Teva UK Ltd and Others v Gilead Sciences Inc. came out a the Metropolitan Court of Budapest handed down a decision regarding Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp’s (MSD) application for an SPC re the combination of ezetimibe and rosuvastatin. [read post]
14 Aug 2019, 7:25 am
The AmeriKat hiding from work-relatedintruders in the Castello's gardenRight at the end of July, came big news from the Irish Supreme Court in Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Clonmel Healthcare Ltd 2019 IESC 65. [read post]
10 Apr 2016, 1:47 am
However, many cases fall somewhere between these two extremes, with an opposition being only partly successful, and/or the Hearing Officer finding that successful grounds of opposition might nonetheless be overcome by some form of amendment to the patent specification and claims.An example of this last type of outcome is the subject of a recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Merck Sharpe & Dohme (Australia) Pty Ltd v Genentech Inc [2016]… [read post]
