Search for: "Smith & Nephew, Inc. " Results 161 - 180 of 357
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Aug 2008, 11:22 am
Department of Justice settlement with four medical device companies, Zimmer, Inc., DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Biomet, Inc., and Smith & Nephew, Inc., these back door consulting agreements must now be made public. [read post]
3 Nov 2006, 11:25 am
Smith & Nephew, global provider of leading-edge knee replacements, recalled an orthopaedic implant from the US market. [read post]
20 Jul 2015, 2:43 am
******************PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE Never too late 54 [week ending on Sunday 5 July] - Google v Oracle and Microsoft/Kyocera settlement | GC and Nagoya | Life Science IP Summit 2015 | (Kat)onomics of patents | Case T-15/13 Group Nivelles v OHIM | Case T‑521/13 Alpinestars Research Srl v OHIM v Kean Tung Cho and Ling-Yuan Wang Yu | Smith & Nephew Plc v ConvaTec Technologies Inc | Multi Time… [read post]
27 Jul 2015, 9:35 am
| Pro-Football Inc v Amanda Blackhorse et al. [read post]
2 Aug 2015, 4:01 pm
.* Smith & Nephew seek to go to the Supreme Court and EPO proceedings continue - the war is not overAfter many posts on Smith & Nephew v Convatec (Court of Appeal judgment here, here, and here; first instance judgment of Mr Justice Birss here), Neil covers the last episodes of the series, both in the UK and in Eponia.* Best thing since sliced bread -- or even better? [read post]
7 Feb 2012, 3:30 pm by eithurburn@getnicklaw.com
  Additional defendants in the lawsuit are Biomet and its subsidiary EBI, and medical device companies DJO and Smith & Nephew. [read post]
14 Dec 2015, 9:43 am by Dennis Crouch
Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al., No. 15-559 (Commilre-hash – if actions were “not objectively unreasonable” can they constitute inducement?) [read post]
21 Jun 2021, 12:07 pm by George Quillin and Jeanne Gills
Arthrex, Smith & Nephew, and the government all asked the Supreme Court to weigh in. [read post]
27 Dec 2012, 7:15 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
Smith & Nephew, Inc., 688 F.3d 1342, 1367 (Fed. [read post]
9 Jun 2018, 2:26 pm by Howard Knopf
Pardhan et al. (1999) 85 C.P.R. (3d) 489 Affirming 77 C.P.R. (3d) 501 (FCA)·       Smith & Nephew Inc. v. [read post]
10 Aug 2015, 1:45 am
 | Criminalisation of IP and economics | Keeping count of blocked websites in the UK |Birkin Bags | Patentability of user interface designs in Germany |Smith & Nephew v ConvaTec | Report on IPEC litigation |does Twitter have a future? [read post]