Search for: "U. S. v. Peters" Results 321 - 340 of 388
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
Although the Court of Appeal was clear, in Neurim v Generics [2020] EWCA Civ 793, that deciding to uphold the lower court’s decision not to grant a pharmaceutical patent PI was based on the specific facts of that case, the Patents Court has subsequently refused two further pharmaceutical PIs (Neurim v Teva [2022] EWHC 954 (Pat) and [2022] EWHC 1641(Pat), and Novartis v Teva [2022] EWHC 959 (Ch)). [read post]
Joining the majority of European courts, the Paris Court of Justice ruled that Eli Lilly’s patent, which relates to the combined administration of pemetrexed disodium and vitamin B12, was infringed by the marketing of Fresenius’ pemetrexed diacid. [read post]
The format and the wording that is applied by authors in this text is quite variable, but this content may be still quite informative, as shown in some examples taken from Journal of Clinical Investigation, Heliyon, Nature Communication, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, and Science. [read post]
15 Apr 2024, 9:01 pm by renholding
Those third parties included Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), the Blockchain Association, Katie Cox and Professors Peter Conti-Brown, Morgan Ricks,3Julie Andersen Hill and David Zaring.4 In his amicus brief, former Senator Toomey stated that the purpose for his amendment requiring the Federal Reserve Board to maintain a database was to increase the transparency and public accountability of the Federal Reserve Banks’ master account approval… [read post]
19 Feb 2012, 8:55 pm by Lawrence Solum
Brest's article initiated an intense theoretical debate over the merits of originalism that continues today. [read post]
7 May 2023, 6:00 am by Lawrence Solum
Brest's article initiated an intense theoretical debate over the merits of originalism that continues today. [read post]
31 Oct 2010, 12:30 pm by Lawrence Solum
Brest's article initiated an intense theoretical debate over the merits of originalism that continues today. [read post]
14 Nov 2021, 6:30 am by Sandy Levinson
 Consider Chief Justice Warren’s laconic statement in Loving v. [read post]