Search for: "Kirin v. Kirin"
Results 61 - 80
of 83
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2012, 5:01 pm
This is an appeal against the revocation of the patent under consideration by the Opposition Division (OD).Claim 1 of the main request before the Board was identical to claim 1 as granted and read:1. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 10:19 am
This one is by screenwriter Michael Alan Rubin, who claims the film copies elements from his script, “Mickey and Kirin”. [read post]
28 Jul 2011, 3:00 am
Distinct issues of construction arose in respect of claims 1 and 3 of the patent:Claim 1:A wound dressing comprising a blend of discrete modified cellulose gel forming fibres with at least one other type of discrete gel forming fibres.Claim 3:A wound dressing as claimed in any preceding claim wherein the dressing comprises a wound contacting surface consisting of a blend of discrete modified cellulose fibres with at least one other type of discrete gel forming fibres.Setting out the law, the Judge… [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 1:44 pm
Sighted this morning, breaking the surface just off the Strand, the judgment of Mr Justice Arnold in MedImmune v Novartis [2011] EWHC 1669 (Pat) certainly fits the legend.In characteristic style, the judgment is as comprehensive as one would wish. [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 11:08 pm
& Filmworks, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Jun 2011, 2:03 am
Currently, an unsuccessful opponent is not estopped from bringing revocation proceedings, largely because of the difference in onus applying at the opposition versus revocation stage: Genetics Institute v Kirin-Amgen at [17] and note Clinique at [13] (trade mark). [read post]
11 May 2011, 4:54 am
General UNCTAD: Bundle of opportunities to improve medicines access in LDCs (IP Watch) Australia: Why IP professionals must take ‘gene patent’ opponents seriously (Patentology) Australia: FCA finds fatal flaw in Plant Breeders Rights Act: Elders Rural Services Australia Limited v Registrar of Plant Breeder’s Rights (Patentology) (ipwars) Finland: Decision on parallel import of pharmaceuticals (Class 46) Italy: Again on MA filing as a preparatory act of marketing –… [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 3:02 pm
These included (i) adopting a method of claim construction that takes explicit account of public policy and/or that which merits the invention its patent protection (see eg American Cyanamid Co (Dann’s) Patent (HL 1971), Biogen v Medeva (1995 HL) and Kirin-Amgen (2004 HL); (ii) creating more defences to infringement/compulsory licensing provisions; (iii) relying more on remedies; and/or (iv) reintroducing a law of fair basis. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 3:38 am
General GSK forms alliance for development of gene therapy techniques for rare diseases (Patent Docs) Emerging economies’ new initiative on falsified and substandard medicines (IP Watch) Michèle Rivasi asks question about ACTA and Access to Medicine (KEI) As negotiators launch talks on biodiversity, industry requests IP protection (IP Watch) Negotiators persist on biodiversity benefit-sharing treaty despite slipping deadlines (IP Watch) New draft biodiversity treaty text shows much work… [read post]
7 Sep 2010, 6:10 pm
Highlights this week included: CAFC: Disclosure that merely allows PHOSITA to ‘envision’ the claimed invention fails written description: Goeddel v Sugano (Peter Zura’s 271 Patent Blog) (Patently-O) (Patent Prospector) Evista (Raloxifene) – US: CAFC upholds decision against Teva: Eli Lilly & Co v Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc (Patent Docs) (The IP Factor) Aranesp (Darbepoetin) – EU: ECJ says ‘no’ to Kirin Amgen,… [read post]
6 Sep 2010, 12:42 am
Kirin Amgen Inc. v Lietuvos Respublikos valstybinis patent? [read post]
31 Aug 2010, 10:01 pm
– state of research and development of new drugs in Indian pharma industry (Spicy IP) US: The Financial Times’ take on gene patenting (Patent Docs) US: Seattle Biotech companies fight over allegedly similar names: Mirina Corp. v. [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 5:05 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: http://duncanbucknell.com/subscribe/ Highlights this week included: Cozaar (Losartan), Hyzaar (Hydrochlorothiazide; Losartan) – US: Teva prevails in generic Cozaar/Hyzaar 180-day exclusivity forfeiture litigation: Teva v Kathleen Sebelius (FDA Law Blog) (SmartBrief) Nexavar (Sorafenib) - India: More on Bayer patent linkage - Supreme Court admits special leave petition filed by Bayer… [read post]
3 Mar 2010, 5:05 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: http://duncanbucknell.com/subscribe/ Highlights this week included: Cozaar (Losartan), Hyzaar (Hydrochlorothiazide; Losartan) – US: Teva prevails in generic Cozaar/Hyzaar 180-day exclusivity forfeiture litigation: Teva v Kathleen Sebelius (FDA Law Blog) (SmartBrief) Nexavar (Sorafenib) - India: More on Bayer patent linkage - Supreme Court admits special leave petition filed by Bayer… [read post]
28 Jan 2010, 7:49 am
, Inc. v. [read post]
6 Jan 2010, 10:44 am
Since, as Neuberger (judge, as he was) said (I believe in the erythropoietin case, Kirin Amgen) that "life is too short to consider the file history", his argument may fly. [read post]
22 Oct 2009, 3:29 am
This judgment is a lot shorter than that of the first instance decision, weighing in at a mere 133 paragraphs.The IPKat hasn't yet had time to digest for the benefit of legal beagles, but here are a couple of snippets for legal whippets:* After summarising Kirin-Amgen v Hoechst Marion Roussel [see earlier IPKat post here] and saying that one might suppose there was no more to say on the subject of claim construction after that ruling, the Court said: "13. ... the skilled… [read post]
31 Jul 2009, 1:50 pm
W L Gore & Associates GmbH v. [read post]
2 Jul 2009, 11:51 am
An example of an insufficiency of this type is the molecular weight test in Kirin Amgen at [121] which made it impossible to tell whether there was infringement or not. [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 7:52 am
(IP Think Tank) Brazilian public-private partnerships in the pharma industry (IP tango) EU: ECJ to rule on reference on SPC Regulation interpretation from Lithuania in Kirin Amgen, Inc. v Lietuvos Respublikos valstybinis patentų biuras (The SPC Blog) India: Delhi High Court Dasatinib order: Is patent-drug regulatory linkage a necessity? [read post]
