Search for: "Myers et al" Results 181 - 200 of 314
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2007, 4:57 am by Ricky E. Bagolie
OCs (Estimated Relative Risk or Odds Ratio with 95% CI) Bloemenkamp et al,[8]1995 Case-Control 2.2 (0.9-5.4) Spitzer (Transnational),[9] 1996 Case-Control 1.5 (1.1-2.2) Bloemankamp et al,[13] 1999 Case-Control 1.9 (0.8-4.5) Jick et al (UK-GPRD),[14] 2000 Cohort/Case-Control 1.9 (1.3-2.8)/2.3 (1.3-3.9) Farley et al (WHO),[6] 1995 Case-Control 2.4 (1.3-4.6) Jick et al (UK-GPRD),[7] 1995 Cohort/Case-Control 1.9… [read post]
26 Sep 2010, 10:08 pm by Marie Louise
Lenovo International, et. al. / No, DED Brigham and Women’s Hospital Inc. et al v. [read post]
12 Sep 2007, 12:55 am
BILL McCOLLUM, ET AL., Respondents. ____________________________/ PETITIONER'S EMERGENCY MOTION TO RELINQUISH JURISDICTION INORDER TO ALLOW THE LOWER COURT TO RULE ON "MOTION FORREHEARING AND/OR CLARIFICATION" THE PETITIONER, IAN DECO LIGHTBOURNE, by and through undersignedcounsel, hereby requests that this Court grant his emergency request to relinquish jurisdiction tothe lower court based on the following: 1. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 12:37 am by Kelly
Use of pipeline system (IP tango) EU: Notes from EU Parliament meeting on innovation+access for medical technologies (KEI) Netherlands: District Court of The Hague declares Dutch part of Bayer’s European patent covering anti-TNF alpha human monoclonal antibodies invalid (Kluwer Patent Blog) Southeast Asia: Generic drug market picks up steam in Southeast Asia, finds Front & Sullivan (GenericsWeb) Spain: Commercial Court No 5 of Barcelona: obtaining price for generic medicament an act of… [read post]
6 Aug 2017, 6:33 am by Associates and Bruce L. Scheiner
Tricam Industries Inc. et al., a South Florida resident filed the personal injury lawsuit in the U.S. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 7:12 am
The Maniloff and Mooney article also includes their third annual Coverage for Dummies et al. special report. [read post]
6 May 2013, 4:33 pm
Inc. et Al., he concluded that claim 4 of the '149 patent should have been held invalid, as 'newly discovered results of known processes directed to the same purpose are not patentable'. [read post]