Search for: "PMA COMPANIES, INC."
Results 61 - 74
of 74
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2010, 12:54 pm
Wyeth, Inc. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 2:55 pm
Medtronic, Inc., 623 F.3d 1200 (8th Cir. 2010) (we previously discussed Bryant here). [read post]
5 Feb 2015, 1:44 pm
Aventis Pasteur, Inc., 270 F. [read post]
23 Oct 2008, 9:03 am
See Albertsons, Inc., v. [read post]
7 Feb 2008, 10:46 am
Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996), and with PMA devices currently. [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 11:22 am
Mylan, Inc., 2009 WL 4730820 (S.D.W. [read post]
27 Dec 2011, 9:56 am
Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 951 N.E.2d 1238 (Ill. [read post]
19 Jul 2007, 1:47 pm
Such a duty would require drug manufacturers to rely upon the representations made by competitor drug companies. [read post]
22 Dec 2011, 11:59 am
Because the product was a PMA device and all the usual claims were preempted. [read post]
24 Jan 2010, 9:40 am
Donahue, CEO and President Bioscan, Inc. 45 Dusty Trail Drive Placitas, New Mexico 87043 Ref. #: DEN-03-18 Dear Ms. [read post]
24 Jan 2010, 9:40 am
Donahue, CEO and President Bioscan, Inc. 45 Dusty Trail Drive Placitas, New Mexico 87043 Ref. #: DEN-03-18 Dear Ms. [read post]
2 May 2008, 7:00 am
: (Patent Baristas), US: How to avoid a permanent injunction: the lessons of Amgen v Hoffman-LaRoche: (Patent Docs), US: Jarvik Heart’s PTE request based on PMA shell/module submission dates flatlines; ruling on initiation of PTE ‘review period’ mirrors FDA policy for ‘fast track’ products: (FDA Law Blog) Pharma & Biotech - Products Kytril (Granisetron) – Exclusivity ‘parking’ still… [read post]
12 Dec 2007, 2:33 pm
The first wave of defense briefing is now complete in Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 2:08 pm
Wyeth Laboratories, Inc., 533 N.E.2d 748 (Ohio 1988) (the Ohio Supreme Court rejecting the theory). [read post]
