Search for: "Ely Lilly" Results 1121 - 1140 of 2,157
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
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]
18 Nov 2011, 6:51 am
 And this week the IPKat has also learned the details of the Competition Law Association's Golding Essay Prize, courtesy of his still-technically-young friend Christopher Stothers (Arnold & Porter): Following the Supreme Court’s judgment in Eli Lilly v Human Genome Sciences (noted here), a prize of £1,000 is to be awarded for an essay of up to 5,000 words submitted by a student, trainee solicitor, pupil barrister, devil barrister (from Scotland),… [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 3:27 am
The AIPPI UK Group is holding a rapid response event, "The Supreme Court's judgment in HGS v Eli Lilly" next week, on Tuesday 22 November 2011 in fact, at 5.30pm for 6pm in the London office of Allen & Overy. [read post]
13 Nov 2011, 1:53 pm by Tom Huddleston Jr.
The Skadden M&A partner led the firm's team advising Amylin Pharmaceuticals on an agreement that ends litigation with Eli Lilly and also dissolves an Amylin-Lilly alliance aimed at developing and selling diabetes drugs--with Amylin in line to acquire full global rights to those drugs over the next two years. [read post]
11 Nov 2011, 11:00 am by James Hamilton
The PCAOB staff is digesting the information gleaned from the Task Force before putting out any guidance in this area.SAG member Arnold Hanish of Eli Lilly noted that this area poses significant audit risk and should have a high priority. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 11:11 am
Indianapolis IN - Trademark lawyers for Eli Lilly and Company of Indianapolis, Indiana filed a trademark infringement suit in the Southern District of Indiana alleging Yanchep Veterinary Clinic, Proprietary Limited Company, Petsvetshop, Proprietary Limited Company,, Paul Sorensen and Dr. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 1:49 am by Marie Louise
  Highlights this week included: UK Supreme Court: Industrial application and biotech patents: Human Genome Sciences v Eli Lilly (EPLAW) (IPKat) (IPKat) (Patently-O) (Sufficient Description) (IAM)   Please join the discussion by adding your [...] [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 3:46 pm by Tom Huddleston Jr.
The deal resolves outstanding litigation Amylin launched earlier this year against Lilly and ends an almost decade-long partnership formed to develop and sell the diabetes drug Byetta. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 10:37 am
In 2009, Eli Lilly cut a check for $1.4 billion after charges were leveled about the improper marketing of Zyprexa, an antipsychotic, for children and elderly patients. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 10:33 am by Mark Zamora
 Eli Lilly & Co. isn’t responsible for the death of college student who was taking the drugmaker’s Zyprexa antipsychotic medication, a jury ruled in the first case to go to trial over the drug.Jurors in state court in Los Angeles deliberated about 11 hours over two days before clearing Lilly of responsibility for the 2007 death of Cody Tadai, a 20-year-old community college student who succumbed to diabetes-related illnesses while taking Zyprexa for… [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 9:23 am
According to this class action lawsuit against Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Eli Lilly, consumers that use the diabetes drug Actos are seeking compensation and medical monitoring due to the drug companies’ failure to properly warn about the risk of developing bladder cancer from taking Actos. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 12:06 pm
. - The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom has ruled against Indianapolis-based Eli Lilly & Company in a patent dispute. [read post]
7 Nov 2011, 7:51 am
That same year, Eli Lilly paid $1.4 billion to settle claims that it improperly marketed its antipsychotic drug Zyprexa for use in children and elderly patients. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 9:58 am
Upon motion by Eli Lilly, a previous ruling in the case had invalidated the patent based on arguments from Eli Lilly that the claimed uses of the synthesized protein were too vague. [read post]
4 Nov 2011, 4:34 am by tracey
Eli Lilly & Co v Human Genome Sciences Inc [2011] UKSC 51;  [2011] WLR (D)  312 “Since the Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had adopted a consistent approach to patents for biological material, the English courts should follow the principles of law set out in its decisions. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 6:51 am by Joe Palazzolo
Other pharma companies have cracked the billion-dollar threshold, including Eli Lilly & Co., which agreed to pay $1.4 billion over sales of its Zyprexa anti-psychotic medicine. [read post]
3 Nov 2011, 3:42 am by sally
Supreme Court Rainy Sky SA & Orsd v Kookmin Bank [2011] UKSC 50 (2 November 2011) Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company [2011] UKSC 51 (2 November 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Smith & Anor v Jafton Properties Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1251 (02 November 2011) Shiva Ltd v Transport for London [2011] EWCA Civ 1189 (02 November 2011) High Court (Chancery Division) Business Dream Ltd, Re Insolvency Act 1986 [2011] EWHC 2860 (Ch) (02 November 2011) High… [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 11:56 pm by Dharmendra Chatur
Human Genome Sciences Inc (Appellant) v Eli Lilly and Company (Respondent) [see judgment, press summary, BAILII] In holding that gene sequences can have industrial application, reversing the lower courts’ findings, the Supreme Court gave primacy two policy arguments- attracting biosciences investment into the UK and bringing UK interpretations in compliance with the European Patent Convention. [read post]
2 Nov 2011, 11:56 pm by Dharmendra Chatur
Human Genome Sciences Inc (Appellant) v Eli Lilly and Company (Respondent) [see judgment, press summary, BAILII] In holding that gene sequences can have industrial application, reversing the lower courts’ findings, the Supreme Court gave primacy two policy arguments- attracting biosciences investment into the UK and bringing UK interpretations in compliance with the European Patent Convention. [read post]