Search for: "Hoffmann v. Hoffmann"
Results 321 - 340
of 463
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Sep 2010, 7:50 am
The same good Lord had a number of cameo roles in IP case; in one, he concurred with Lord Hoffmann in the celebrated House of Lords ruling in Synthon BV v SmithKline Beecham [2005] UKHL 59 (noted here by the IPKat), the paroxetine patent case which turned on issues of enabling disclosure. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 6:10 pm
Patent and Trademark Office et. al, (Prior Art) US: District Court New Jersey: Drug label may provide evidence of intent to induce infringement even though required by the FDA: Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 6:14 am
" Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 2:07 pm
Hoffmann LaRoche Inc., had entered a verdict of $10.5 million in favor of a woman that claimed the drug Accutane caused her inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) . [read post]
20 Aug 2010, 6:27 am
Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2010, 4:28 am
Hoffmann-LaRoche Inc. [read post]
9 Aug 2010, 7:59 pm
Hoffmann LaRoche Inc., ATL- L-8213-05, New Jersey Superior Court, Atlantic County (Atlantic City). [read post]
6 Aug 2010, 9:10 am
Hoffmann LaRoche Inc., ATL- L-8213-05, New Jersey Superior Court, Atlantic County (Atlantic City). [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 10:04 pm
Ultimately, as Lord Hoffmann states in R-v-Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms [2000] 2 AC 115, 131, Parliament can, if it chooses, legislate contrary to fundamental principles of human rights (provided it squarely confronts what it is doing). [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 6:53 am
Lords Judge and Hoffmann have also made similar points in the two most recent Judicial Studies Board lectures (see our post) to the effect that the European Court of Human Rights has aggrandised its jurisdiction recently and domestic courts should not take its judgments as the final word on domestic law. [read post]
31 Jul 2010, 4:25 am
Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., 580 F.3d 1340, 1374 (Fed. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 6:48 pm
Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., 580 F.3d 1340, 1374 (Fed. [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 5:00 am
Hoffmann-La Roche Inc., 892 A.2d 694, (N.J. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 1:05 am
In Berkoff v. [read post]
17 Jul 2010, 2:11 am
This is a matter of law for the judge ([49], Lord Hoffmann) and involves drawing a line between matters in which the public is legitimately interested and matters in which the public might have an interest, but which are nevertheless not matters of public interest ([147] Baroness Hale). [read post]
16 Jul 2010, 2:00 am
Gaza conflict a “lawful excuse” In R v ? [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 5:49 am
See Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. [read post]
11 Jul 2010, 2:43 am
In Supreme Auto Group Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 9:39 am
HHJ Rylands assessed the claim for mesne profits on the basis of the decision in Ministry of Defence v Ashman [1993] 25 HLR 514. [read post]
8 Jul 2010, 9:39 am
HHJ Rylands assessed the claim for mesne profits on the basis of the decision in Ministry of Defence v Ashman [1993] 25 HLR 514. [read post]
