Search for: "WARNER LAMBERT COMPANY"
Results 61 - 80
of 218
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2020, 11:04 am
In 1959, a federal court ruled that Listerine’s distributor— Warner-Lambert Pharmaceutical—must continue to abide by the original 1881 royalty agreement despite the fact that Listerine’s formula had previously been made public. [read post]
4 Mar 2008, 2:34 pm
Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
9 Nov 2009, 6:01 am
In the agreement the lawyers eventually hammered out, the Pfizer unit, Warner-Lambert, pleaded guilty to two felony counts of marketing a drug for unapproved uses. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 9:50 am
Rank Patent Plaintiff Number of Cases Filed 1 Acacia 190 2 Laughlin Products 162 3 Pfizer 149 4 Monsanto Company 125 5 Ronald A Katz Technology Licensing 107 6 Patent Group (False Marking) 106 7 Novartis 104 8 Abbott Laboratories 103 9 Astrazeneca 80 10 Sanofi-Aventis 78 11 Oakley 77 12 Warner-Lambert Company 74 13 U.S. [read post]
29 Feb 2008, 9:03 am
The issue in this case, Warner-Lambert v. [read post]
23 Sep 2007, 9:57 pm
While those motions were pending, Warner-Lambert unsuccessfully sought a preliminary injunction to enjoin the defendants from launching their products at-risk. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 9:04 am
Warner-Lambert & Co., 467 F.3d 85, 97 (2d Cir.2006)(same Michigan statute was not preempted by Buckman), affirmed sub nom, Warner-Lambert Co., LLC v. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 9:45 am
(patent infringement) 11/23: Pfizer, Inc., Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals, Warner-Lambert Company and Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 11:29 pm
”(emphasis added) (citing Warner-Lambert, 316 F.3d at1354–55). [read post]
31 May 2015, 3:47 am
Last week the Court of Appeal said that was incorrect in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWCA Civ 556, and that actually all that is required is for the infringer to know, or be able to reasonably foresee, that the medicament would be used to treat the condition (Katpost here). [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 6:32 am
Brian commented that perhaps Mr Justice Arnold (who has heard the Warner-Lambert and Lilly cases), is not looking at the claims from the right perspective. [read post]
29 Jan 2009, 1:31 am
Let's call it a perfect fix -- though the repair won't work smoothly for the 19,000 workers slated to lose their jobs of the combined companies' 129,000 total.On the way to the merger shop, consider Pfizer's megadeal history.Before the company overpaid for Warner Lambert in 2000, its shares peaked above $48. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 4:01 pm
Also, the appeal in the Warner-Lambert case that will be heard in late April will no doubt turn up some interesting new arguments – which could lead to the Court of Appeal for England and Wales disagreeing with Mr Justice Arnold on one or more points. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 1:15 am
* Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 2, still at first instance: more on Swiss claims, Skinny Labels, and no StrikeoutDarren covers another Arnoldian decision in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 223 (Pat). [read post]
9 Feb 2019, 2:13 am
| The IP term (thus far) of the millennium: the curious story of the adoption of "patent troll" and "internet trolling" | No pain, no gain: Plausibility in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Testing the boundaries of subjectivity: Infringement of Swiss-type claims in Warner-Lambert v Actavis | Is SPINNING generic? [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 2:43 pm
. * Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 3: a "lyrical" solution to a painful patent disputeAfter the Patents Court ruling of Mr Justice Arnold in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others, which Darren reported here, Jeremy has got some news to break on that painful patent war.* Blind faith not enough when proving bad faith: a case of ColourblindnessValentina reports on a fresh trade mark dispute that the General Court has just… [read post]
22 Sep 2007, 8:18 am
And that in 2004 Warner Lambert pleaded guilty to charges that it marketed Neurontin for such uses and paid more than $430 million in fines. [read post]
23 Jul 2016, 5:53 pm
The facts of the case may be summarised as follows: In March 2015, Warner-Lambert filed an application for provisional measures against several companies that had obtained authorizations to market generics of pregabalin. [read post]
24 Jan 2009, 5:37 am
"In 2000, Pfizer bought Warner-Lambert for $116 billion because it made Lipitor. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 6:38 am
In 1999, however, the FDA held hearings relating to safety concerns over Warner-Lambert’s blockbuster. [read post]
