Search for: "SANOFI-AVENTIS V APOTEX"
Results 1 - 20
of 92
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2020, 5:29 am
The AusKat won't be restrained fromlaunching to attack that wrinkle on thesheets.....In a long-awaited judgment that will affect applications in Australia for interlocutory injunctions to restrain launch of pharmaceutical products, as well as claims for compensation following wrongful exclusion of generic or biosimilar pharmaceuticals from the market, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed a claim made by the Commonwealth government for compensation from Sanofi (Commonwealth of… [read post]
21 Jun 2016, 4:00 am
Absent more definitive consistent instruction from the Federal Court of Appeal, or direct SCC pronouncement on the proper approach, patent drafters are still advised to keep their promises to a minimum to avoid disclosure challenges regarding sound prediction. _________________________ [1] Eli Lilly v Hospira 2016 FC 47 (Barnes) [2] Gilead v Idenix 2015 FC 1156 at para 381 (Annis), under appeal A-483-15, adopting earlier reasoning of Astra v Apotex 2014 FC 638… [read post]
14 May 2015, 4:00 am
In Sanofi v Apotex 2013 FCA 186 (Plavix/clopidogrel)[5], the appellate court defined “The Promise” as “the standard against which the utility of the invention described in the patent is measured”. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 2:36 am
A court ruling has revealed that the Commonwealth of Australia (i.e. the Federal Government) is seeking to recover $60 million it considers has been ‘overpaid’ for the anti-clotting drug marketed by Sanofi (formerly Sanofi-Aventis) and Bristol-Meyers Squibb under the brand name PLAVIX: Commonwealth of Australia v Sanofi-Aventis [2015] FCA 384.Sanofi was the owner of Australian Patent No. 597784, which includes claims directed… [read post]
26 Apr 2015, 4:30 am
Music and movie firms back website-blocking in Singapore http://t.co/VyYvVZsIN0 -> Goebbels' estate sues Random House for diary royalties http://t.co/1PDCxZpeuA -> Companies' 'fears are real' with Chinese cyber law http://t.co/4DwKwMLVEx -> European privacy watchdogs join forces to probe Facebook – Oneindia http://t.co/e6M4Q2OEcC -> Computer and Internet Law Weekly Updates for 2015-04-18: blogged: Computer and Internet Law Weekly Updates for…… [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 4:30 am
Apotex case Monday, case summary and webcast to listen http://t.co/f1KeAesP3r -> [read post]
18 Jan 2015, 9:06 pm
LLC; Aventis Pharma S.A.; Sanofi • Defendants: Apotex Corp.; Apotex Inc. [read post]
21 Nov 2014, 4:00 am
Justice Gleason found Sanofi-Aventis 2007 was “dispositive” and it was an abuse for the brand to re-litigate obviousness in case2: “That issue was the same in both cases and arose directly from the patent, itself. [read post]
30 Oct 2014, 8:21 am
Here's the Court's official summary - which doesn't necessarily indicate precisely what the real issues will turn out to be:35886Sanofi-Aventis, et al. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2014, 11:39 pm
The judge at first instance (in Apotex Pty Ltd v AstraZeneca AB (No 4) [2013] FCA 162) had found that the AstraZeneca inventions claimed in the patents at issue lacked an inventive step based, in part, on the reasoning of an earlier Full Court panel in Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis [2009] FCAFC 134. [read post]
26 Jul 2014, 9:14 pm
Methods of medical treatment came under scrutiny of the US Supreme Court in Mayo Collaborative Services v Prometheus Laboratories, Inc and the Australian High Court in Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd (see High Court Rules Methods of Medical Treatment Patent-Eligible). [read post]
13 Jan 2014, 9:59 pm
By Gary Cox, Craig Humphris and Donna Meredith -- In the decision of Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 50 (order), the High Court of Australia, Australia's supreme court, confirmed that methods of medical treatment are a "manner of manufacture" and therefore represent a patentable invention in Australia. [read post]
4 Dec 2013, 4:34 am
Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 50 (4 December 2013)A panel of five judges of the High Court has decided, by a majority of 4-1, that methods of treating the human body by the administration of a therapeutic drug constitute patent-eligible subject matter in Australia. [read post]
16 Sep 2013, 4:00 am
The FCA has recently adopted an interventionist approach in the area of patent validity in Sanofi-Aventis v Apotex 2013 FCA 186 (“Sanofi 2013”). [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 11:43 am
Lucier was a thalidomide case against GSK, SmithKline Beecham, Sanofi-Aventis, Grunethal, and others and was originally filed in Pennsylvania state court. [read post]
2 Aug 2012, 2:57 pm
Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 102 Share on Facebook [read post]
22 Jul 2012, 6:40 am
Appeal Decision: Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 102 (18 July 2012) Appeal from: Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd v Apotex Pty Ltd (No 3) [2011] FCA 846 See also: Australian Federal Court ‘Evergreens’ ARAVA for Sanofi-Aventis Claim construction – second medical use claims directed to treating specific… [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 4:34 pm
Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 102 Share on Facebook [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm
LLC v. [read post]
19 Apr 2012, 10:00 pm
LLC v. [read post]
