Search for: "State v. Lilly"
Results 801 - 820
of 912
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 736 F.Supp.2d 219, 222-23 (D.D.C. 2010); White v. [read post]
1 May 2008, 11:21 am
See Hamilton v. [read post]
27 Aug 2012, 1:31 pm
Id. at *31-32 (quoting Doe v. [read post]
8 Aug 2017, 5:06 am
Lilly. [read post]
19 Jan 2009, 4:00 am
Amelia County Sheriff's Office7th Cir.o Muslim Associate States Cause of Action Against Large Law Firm For Post 9-11 DiscriminationHasan v. [read post]
19 Sep 2008, 6:12 pm
John McCain wants to overturn Roe v. [read post]
5 Feb 2009, 6:44 am
United States, 431 U. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:39 am
The patent therefore stated that inhibition of PD-1 or PD-L1 was effective in treating cancer.Claim breadth As well as deciding there was a clear and unambiguous disclosure, Birss J considered priority from the point of view of plausibility and claim breadth. [read post]
19 Sep 2014, 5:50 pm
Steven gave an example of the Canadian Federal Court case of Lilly Icos v Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals (2006) FC 1465, where communications between Pfizer and a UK patent attorney was held not to be privileged. [read post]
1 Apr 2024, 6:48 pm
Toth v. [read post]
10 May 2017, 8:01 am
Reed (1971), her majority opinion in the VMI gender discrimination case, United States v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 8:30 am
In Bayer AG v. [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 12:34 pm
Republic of Germany v. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 9:39 pm
If this Kat were not busying himself tomorrow (Tuesday, that is) in chairing the IP Finance seminar on FRAND licensing, he would be beetling over to the very comfy London office of Allen & Overy, in Bishops Square, to enjoy a rapid response seminar on the UK Supreme Court's extremely recent ruling in Human Genome Sciences v Eli Lilly (noted by the IPKat here). [read post]
25 Jun 2013, 6:13 pm
In Vance v Ball State University, the 5-4 majority endorsed a narrow definition of the meaning of “supervisor” for purposes of determining employer liability under Title VII. [read post]
9 Aug 2008, 1:50 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Thinktank Global week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: The end of William Patry’s blog: (Patry Copyright Blog), (Excess Copyright), (Patently-O), (Chicago IP Litigation Blog), (Michael Geist), (The Fire of Genius), (Techdirt), (Patry Copyright Blog), Kitchin J clarifies scope of biotech patents, in particular gene sequence patents: Eli Lilly & Co v Human Genome… [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 2:00 am
Eli Lilly and Company, 598 F.3d 1336, 1340 (2010). [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 2:00 am
Eli Lilly and Company, 598 F.3d 1336, 1340 (2010). [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
At least the state of the art at the time of the plaintiff’s use applies – unknown and later discovered risks are irrelevant. [read post]
31 Jul 2014, 1:12 pm
Eli Lilly Co., 342 N.W.2d 37 (1984). [read post]
