Search for: "Do No Harm v. Pfizer Inc."
Results 21 - 40
of 95
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jun 2023, 8:36 am
The data we do have suggests that demotion from a formulary’s preferred tiers may precipitate a large drop in volume, but not nearly large enough to constitute a near-exclusive clause. [read post]
29 Jun 2010, 6:01 pm
(Patent Docs) Sutent (Sunitinib) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed following a Paragraph IV certification: Pfizer Inc. et al. v. [read post]
30 Jun 2010, 5:52 am
(Patent Docs) Sutent (Sunitinib) – US: Patent infringement complaint filed following a Paragraph IV certification: Pfizer Inc. et al. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2011, 12:33 am
General John LaMattian, former head of Pfizer R&D, says industry mergers have harmed R&D efforts (KEI) Non-communicable diseases and IP? [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
Examples are not driving a riding lawnmower parallel to a slope (because you’ll tip over) or only handling asbestos while using a respirator (because breathing asbestos can do nasty things to you). [read post]
20 Jan 2011, 12:50 pm
We blogged about the highly suspect decision in Centocor, Inc. v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 2:01 am
In Do No Harm v. [read post]
24 May 2024, 2:01 am
In Do No Harm v. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
Pfizer, Inc., 716 F.3d 1087, 1092-93 (8th Cir. 2013). [read post]
27 Sep 2007, 11:38 am
Pfizer, Inc., 2004 WL 2191804, *4 & n.4 (S.D. [read post]
19 Sep 2013, 9:53 am
Pfizer, Inc., 712 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2013), Aetna, Inc. v. [read post]
29 May 2015, 8:25 am
The NLDC produced a development plan that would revitalize Fort Trumbull by building housing, office space, and other facilities that would support a new headquarters that Pfizer, Inc. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 12:56 pm
Do the “green”, “eco”, “healthy” and “back to basics” movements ring any bell? [read post]
3 Jul 2008, 7:26 pm
Pfizer, Inc., 812 F. [read post]
21 Nov 2007, 4:08 am
But if this possibility automatically requires that all be joined, the rule that joint tortfeasors are not by virtue of their jointness indispensable parties . . . would be overthrown"Canon, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2013, 2:06 pm
There were lots of different asbestos products, and the same kinds of asbestos products do (or, at least, plaintiffs allege they do) have similar risks. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 5:36 pm
Pfizer, 196 F. [read post]
1 Feb 2013, 9:42 am
Pfizer, Inc., 877 F. [read post]
15 Sep 2011, 5:00 am
[C]onsidering the slight risk of contact polio, the variability of risks of harm (depending on many personal factors, including cleanliness and frequency and type of contact with a recently-vaccinated child), the introduction of individualized medical judgment, and . . . other policy reasons . . ., we do not accept plaintiffs’ invitation to add new requirements to a manufacturer's duty to warn.Plummer v. [read post]
