Search for: "United States v. Purify"
Results 61 - 69
of 69
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
Although as a practical matter this distinction may be of little value, as pharmaceutical companies often have production facilities located outside the United States, it is something to consider when seeking or opposing litigation under § 156. [read post]
27 May 2010, 2:20 pm
Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. [read post]
31 Mar 2010, 6:28 am
United States Patent and Trademark Office et al., 1-09-cv-04515 (NYSD March 29, 2010, Opinion) (Sweet, J.) [read post]
26 Dec 2009, 6:04 pm
All One God Faith, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jul 2009, 3:27 pm
Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Jun 2009, 10:17 am
There was much argument around the claim because the claim just stated the name of the enantiomer, just as some claims merely state the name of the virus or gene or protein. [read post]
4 Aug 2008, 6:30 am
In Hudson v. [read post]
21 Nov 2007, 6:36 am
Figueroa v. [read post]
26 Sep 2007, 1:04 pm
Purepac Pharma, Faulding, Watson Pharma, Danbury Pharma, Teva, Zenith Labs, Ivax, Apotex, Torpharm and Eon Labs) United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (06-1572). [read post]
