Search for: "Bartlett, in Re"
Results 181 - 200
of 437
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Sep 2013, 7:37 am
Bartlett, 133 S. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 8:10 am
Bartlett, 133 S. [read post]
5 Sep 2013, 12:24 pm
Bartlett, 133 S. [read post]
22 Aug 2013, 10:41 am
Forget what we said about setting aside preemption; that claim is clearly preempted post-Bartlett even if the court thought it was not pre-Bartlett. [read post]
19 Aug 2013, 10:20 am
The recent decision in In re Fosamax Products Liability Litigation, 2013 WL 4306434 (S.D.N.Y. [read post]
18 Aug 2013, 8:45 am
“The law is pretty clear on what you’re supposed to do. [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 5:00 am
Likewise, in In re Propulsid Products Liability Litigation, 2003 WL 367739 (E.D. [read post]
2 Aug 2013, 4:30 am
You’re welcome. [read post]
30 Jul 2013, 2:01 pm
Bartlett, 133 S. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 12:41 pm
The (former) President (George Bartlett QC) felt that the LVT may have erred. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 12:41 pm
The (former) President (George Bartlett QC) felt that the LVT may have erred. [read post]
27 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
We’ve already posted here, here, and here, about Bartlett, and during the forum, you’ll hear more of Bexis’ views on the subject – along with those of some folks who actually know what they’re talking about.The Roundtable − Mutual Pharmaceutical Company, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Bartlett, 133 S. [read post]
15 Jul 2013, 5:51 am
In In re Isotretinoin Litigation, No. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Nev. 2011) (FDA compliance “relevant and admissible” but not “a bar to recovery”); Bartlett v. [read post]
3 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Specifically, we’re thinking of both innovator prescription drugs and §510k medical devices. [read post]
30 Jun 2013, 11:33 am
Unless you’re a generic drug maker. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 12:50 pm
We’re happy to announce that one of our earlier #1 worst annual decisions list toppers, Wimbush v. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 8:35 am
Bartlett sharply limited state law remedies against inadequate warnings about design defects. [read post]
20 Jun 2013, 5:00 am
While we’re waiting for the Supreme Court to issue its preemption ruling in the Bartlett case (possibly as early as 10:00 a.m. today), we thought we’d examine the Court’s recent preemption decisions in non-drug/medical device cases, Hillman v. [read post]
