Search for: "SmithKline Beecham Corporation"
Results 61 - 80
of 82
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Jul 2011, 1:21 pm
The crux of the Ninth Circuit’s reasoning in SmithKline Beecham is as follows: Because the products for which PSRs are responsible may be legally dispensed only with a prescription written by a licensed healthcare provider, the relevant purchaser is the healthcare provider, and thus PSRs make a “sale” when they obtain non-binding commitments from providers that they will write a prescription. 635 F.3d at 396. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 2:30 pm
Because six of the appellee corporations are Pennsylvania-based, Pennsylvania can certainly be viewed as possessing a legitimate interest in ensuring that Pennsylvania companies do not manufacture or distribute hazardous products which cause injury. [read post]
29 May 2019, 12:22 pm
If the defendant "knew the risk and decided it was best not to remove it" then that is a factor in favor of maintaining the status quo and granting an injunction (see Aldous LJ in SmithKline Beecham v Apotex [2003] FSR 31 at [40]; see also Arnold J in Warner-Lambert v Actavis [2015] EWHC 72 at [133]). [read post]
1 Apr 2008, 8:27 am
He was joined by SmithKline Beecham Corporation (d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline). [read post]
24 Mar 2015, 7:03 am
SmithKline Beecham Corporation, the Supreme Court explained that the definition of “sale” in 29 U.S.C. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 4:28 pm
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, d.b.a. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 2:00 am
Smithkline Beecham Corp., [855 S.W.2d 248 (Tex. [read post]
6 Aug 2009, 6:50 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
14 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 2008 WL 2491965, at *7 (S.D. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 2:51 am
SmithKline Beecham Corp., 596 F.3d 387, 390 (7th Cir.2010). [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 10:58 am
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 240 F.R.D. 179, 194-95 (E.D. [read post]
17 Sep 2009, 4:30 am
The corporate representative was "not responsible" for the conduct of the surgery. [read post]
19 Jul 2022, 6:14 am
A few egregious articles in the biomedical literature have begun to endorse explicitly asymmetrical standards for inferring causation in the context of environmental or occupational exposures. [read post]
16 Jul 2016, 1:48 pm
Not surprisingly, many of Selikoff’s litigation- and regulatory-driven opinions have not fared well, such as the notions that asbestos causes gastrointestinal cancers and that all asbestos minerals have equal potential and strength to cause mesothelioma. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:12 am
The iconic Hunger Games line, “may the odds be ever in your favor” pretty much sums up how we feel about our top ten best decisions of 2015. [read post]
8 Feb 2008, 7:00 pm
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included:Record labels sue Baidu over providing links to file-sharing sites: (Ars Technica), (Techdirt), (Out-Law), (IP Law360), (Copyfight), Merck’s Fosamax patent expires: Watson Pharmaceuticals to distribute authorized generic version, Teva and Barr also launch FDA approved generic versions: (SmartBrief), (Patent Circle), (In … [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 9:48 pm
Smithkline Beecham Corp., 2007 WL 178564, at *9 (E.D. [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 1:25 pm
Here is IP Think Tank’s weekly selection of top intellectual property news breaking in the blogosphere and internet. [read post]
