Search for: "In re Cipro Cases"
Results 21 - 40
of 78
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Feb 2012, 8:27 pm
In re Cipro Cases I & II, S198616—Review Granted—February 15, 2012 The question presented is whether a suit may be brought under the Cartwright Antitrust Act to challenge “reverse exclusionary payments” made by pharmaceutical manufacturers to settle patent litigation with generic drug producers and prolong the life of the patents in question. [read post]
17 Feb 2012, 4:19 pm
Notable results include: On a petition for review, review was granted in In re Cipro Cases I & II. [read post]
24 Dec 2011, 5:31 am
(See In re Cipro Cases I & II (2004) 121 Cal. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 5:00 am
In In re Cipro Cases I & II, ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Nov. 1, 2011), the Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District, Division One) followed Chavez v. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 6:12 pm
The case, styled as In re Cipro Cases I & II, was initiated in late 2000 and is a proceeding of nine coordinated cases brought by indirect CIPRO purchasers. [read post]
23 May 2011, 1:54 pm
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in In Re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation, Case Nos. 10-2077, 10-2078, 10-2079. [read post]
2 May 2011, 8:13 am
And I’ll be scoping out the shopping carts of others to see if they’re doing the same. [read post]
15 Mar 2011, 11:40 am
Bayer AG (In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litig.), 05-2851-cv(L) (2d Cir. 2010) ("Cipro"). [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 6:36 am
Bayer AG (In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litig.), 05-2851-cv(L) (2d Cir. 2010) (“Cipro”). [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 9:29 pm
Bayer AG (decided below as In re Ciprofloxacin Antitrust Litigation; see also "Second Circuit Denies En Banc Reconsideration in Cipro® Case"). [read post]
28 Feb 2011, 8:27 am
Bayer AG (In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litig.), 05-2851-cv(L) (2d Cir. 2010) (“Cipro”). [read post]
11 Jan 2011, 1:51 pm
(In re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litig.), 2006-2 Trade Cases ¶75,382. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 5:54 am
(Case No. 10-762). [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 2:17 am
Becton, Dickinson & Co (Intellectual Property Law Blog) US: Regents of the University of California pursue new patent re-examination in District Court (Patents Post Grant Blog) US: Microsoft v i4i, the burden of proof and the pharma sector (PatLit) US: IRS issues notice to implement annual fee on brand drugs (FDA Law Blog) US: Bright ‘orphan’ ideas blossom (FDA Law Blog) US: Amicus briefs in AMP v USPTO (Patent Docs) (Patent Docs) (Patent Docs) US: University of California… [read post]
8 Dec 2010, 10:42 am
This is the standard applied by the Second Circuit in Tamoxifen and Cipro, and by the Federal Circuit in In re Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride Antitrust Litig., 544 F.3d 1323 (Fed. [read post]
3 Oct 2010, 9:22 pm
Microsoft case and address the presumption of validity, as well as what implications such a ruling would have on the value of previously acquired property rights. [read post]
15 Sep 2010, 2:40 am
Highlights this week included: 2nd Circuit denies en banc reconsideration in Cipro case: In re Ciprofloxacin Antitrust Litigation (Patent Docs) (FDA Law Blog) (IPBiz) Please join the discussion by adding your comments on any of these stories, and please do let us know if you think we’ve missed something important, or if there is a source you think should be monitored. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 1:05 am
The active members of the circuit issued a brief ruling Tuesday saying they had voted to deny rehearing en banc a case in which a three-judge panel in April affirmed summary judgment for Bayer AG on a Sherman Act challenge concerning a so-called "pay-for-delay" agreement involving the antibiotic drug Cipro. [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 12:20 pm
Barr Labs., Inc., (In re Tamoxifen Citrate Antitrust Litig.), 466 F.3d 187 (2d Cir. 2005), compelled it to do so: “Since Tamoxifen rejected antitrust challenges to reverse payments as a matter of law, we are bound to review the Cipro court’s rulings under the standard adopted in Tamoxifen. [read post]
8 Sep 2010, 9:55 pm
In re Ciprofloxacin Antitrust Litigation By Kevin E. [read post]
