Search for: "SmithKline Beecham Limited"
Results 121 - 140
of 160
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Feb 2011, 4:28 pm
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, d.b.a. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 6:50 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
10 Jun 2009, 10:00 pm
App. 1979).While we think that these cases suffice to illustrate both the general proposition that the learned intermediary rule requires expert testimony that drug/device warnings are adequate as to physicians - and the limitations to that rule - we rather suspect that the initial request that we address the topic was made at least in part with the intent to induce another of our state-by-state surveys. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 6:14 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 413 F.3d 1318, 1325 (Fed. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 9:17 am
Smithkline Beecham Corp., Phila. [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 8:29 am
SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, 88 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2004). [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 9:02 am
The actual risk has a 95 per cent probability of lying somewhere between upper and lower limits (e.g. 2.2 ±0.3, which equals a risk somewhere between 1.9 and 2.5) (the ‘confidence interval’). [read post]
9 Jan 2014, 1:37 pm
., in consideration of the “open and obvious” limitation on the duty to warn:[W]hen a warning would have added nothing to the user’s appreciation of the danger, no duty to warn exists as no benefit would be gained by requiring a warning. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:12 am
Celexa was the first appellate decision recognizing that Mensing (2011 +1) impossibility preemption cannot be limited to generic drugs. [read post]
12 Dec 2014, 5:06 am
The whole of X is not new, otherwise the limitation defined by the process would not be needed. [read post]
29 Apr 2011, 1:03 pm
Because the district court limited its best mode holding to the uncontroverted claims, Wellman, 689 F. [read post]
19 Jun 2012, 10:04 pm
SmithKline Beecham can be found here. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 7:55 am
Vitale’s failure to acknowledge explicitly the limitations of his systematic review, an omission that virtually defines expert witness reports in litigation. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 5:18 am
We've examined it previously, but that was limited to the context of prescription drugs and medical devices. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 5:01 am
”[15] By closing off inquiry into the limits of the DPA methodology, Judge Campbell managed to stumble into a huge analytical gap he blindly ignored, or was unaware of. [read post]
22 Dec 2010, 12:39 pm
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d 387 (7th Cir. 2010). [read post]
21 Dec 2010, 11:36 pm
See Datamize, 417 F.3d at 1354 (stating that "indefiniteness does not depend on the difficulty experienced by a particular person in comparing the claims with the prior art or the claims with allegedly infringing products or acts"); SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. [read post]
