Search for: "Warner-Lambert Company"
Results 1 - 20
of 217
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Mar 2024, 7:24 pm
Patent No. 4,631,286, where the PTO considered “whether Hoechst-Roussel is eligible to file an application for [PTE] based on a regulatory review conducted by its competitor, the marketing applicant Warner-Lambert, wherein Hoechst-Roussel was not associated with the regulatory review that led to FDA approval for commercial marketing of the approved product. [read post]
18 Jan 2024, 9:16 am
Reasoning The Federal Circuit stated that precedent, including Warner-Lambert and its progeny, established that “‘the use . . . claimed in a patent’ under section 271(e)(2)(A) must be the use for which an applicant is seeking marketing approval” in order to find infringement. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 3:40 pm
The English test was developed by the English Supreme Court in a case that concerned sufficiency rather than inventive step [the Warner-Lambert case – RL[3]]. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 2:55 am
June 2023 has just passed, and the newly minted Unified Patent Court is of course still on everyone’s lips. [read post]
29 Mar 2023, 2:50 am
Fig. 3: Plausibility reaches the UK Supreme Court in Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd While Warner Lambert was a decision made in the context of a second medical use claim, this Case Law was soon also applied to product claims in the UK. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 7:15 am
After summarising what the amendment request proposed by 3M entailed, the judge concluded, using the same wording as Lord Briggs in Warner-Lambert, that the proposed amendments to the range of thickness ratios were clearly “designed to make good a claim not thus far advanced in the amended form” (paragraph 13). [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 1:22 pm
Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Macaroli) Dr Reddy's Laboratories (UK) Ltd and others v Warner Lambert LLC and another [2021] EWHC 2182 (Ch) (30 July 2021)Each of the 35 claimants in these proceedings had been awarded an inquiry as to damages either for losses sustained as a result of an interim injunction that the defendants had agreed to pay or for losses resulting from threats of [read post]
14 Jul 2020, 11:04 am
In 1959, a federal court ruled that Listerine’s distributor— Warner-Lambert Pharmaceutical—must continue to abide by the original 1881 royalty agreement despite the fact that Listerine’s formula had previously been made public. [read post]
13 Mar 2020, 1:53 am
A case in point is Warner-Lambert v Generics (UK).However, applications for second-use patents are increasing, so there must be various other incentives and efficiencies at play. [read post]
1 Aug 2019, 2:14 am
Mr Justice Birss particularly followed the approach in Generics v Yeda (IPKat post here) and Warner Lambert (IPKat post here).In Warner Lambert, the Supreme Court considered concept of sufficiency as applied to Swiss-style second medical use patents. [read post]
16 Jul 2019, 1:54 am
Mr Justice Arnold was doubtful of this "since the skilled person is located in the UK" (Generics v Warner Lambert, [2015] EWHC 2548 (Pat)) (para. 118). [read post]
12 Feb 2019, 11:14 pm
On 14 November 2018, the UK Supreme Court handed down its judgment in Warner-Lambert Company LLC (Appellant) v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan and another (Respondents) [2018] UKSC 56. [read post]
9 Feb 2019, 2:13 am
| The IP term (thus far) of the millennium: the curious story of the adoption of "patent troll" and "internet trolling" | No pain, no gain: Plausibility in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Testing the boundaries of subjectivity: Infringement of Swiss-type claims in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Is SPINNING generic? [read post]
6 Dec 2018, 11:14 am
The Pregabalin Molecule Author VaccinationistLicence Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Source Wikipedia Pregabalin Jane Lambert The Supreme Court (Lords Mance, Sumption, Reed, Hodge and Briggs) Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd ) [2018] UKSC 56 (118 4 Nov 2018) This was an appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal in [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 8:14 am
Warner-Lambert denied that the Patent was invalid and alleged that the Patent was infringed. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 3:25 am
Whilst we digest the decision in full, this Kat provides some context to some of key issues of the case.Preceding ProceedingsToday's Supreme Court case is the latest installment in a long-running dispute between Pfizer (parent company of Warner-Lambert) and Actavis et al. [read post]
12 Nov 2018, 1:00 am
Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan & Anor, heard 12-15 Feb 2018. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 1:00 am
Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan & Anor, heard 12-15 Feb 2018. [read post]
29 Oct 2018, 2:00 am
Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan & Anor, heard 12-15 Feb 2018. [read post]
22 Oct 2018, 1:00 am
Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Generics (UK) Ltd t/a Mylan & Anor, heard 12-15 Feb 2018. [read post]
