Search for: "Pfizer, Inc."
Results 1141 - 1160
of 1,512
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Sep 2009, 9:02 am
According to the NewYork Times, the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. has agreed to pay a $2.3 billion fine related to the company’s alleged illegal promotion of its painkiller, Bextra, which the company has now withdrawn from the market. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 8:04 am
Pfizer Inc agreed to plead guilty to a U.S. criminal charge relating to promotion of its now-withdrawn Bextra pain medicine and will pay a record $2.3 billion to settle allegations it improperly marketed 13 medicines. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 7:04 am
Pfizer Inc., the world's largest drug maker, will pay a record $2.3 billion civil and criminal penalty over unlawful prescription drug promotions, the Justice Department announced Sept. 2.Additional web pages: InSync Communication, Drug Expert Witness. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 6:40 am
WASHINGTON - American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 4:13 am
Law Firm Pfizer Inc. ignored a 2005 FDA Warning Letter to stop promoting its antibiotic Zyvox ® as clinically superior to the significantly less expensive, generic vancomycin when its own FDA-approved label indicated otherwise. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 4:08 am
By GARDINER HARRISNY TimesWASHINGTON â€â [read post]
31 Aug 2009, 12:31 am
"Pfizer Inc., et al. v. [read post]
24 Aug 2009, 12:12 am
(c) Legal Expert Connections, Inc., 866-417-7025 www.legalexpertconnections.com [read post]
19 Aug 2009, 2:39 pm
Today, the Supreme Court issued transfer orders in the two Tobacco "grant and hold" cases, Pfizer, Inc. v. [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 9:51 pm
In arguing their motion, Microsoft unfortunately relied on Schering Corp v Pfizer (1999) where, although the Court had excluded five surveys from evidence under the hearsay rule, the Court did not discuss Rule 703 save to say, damagingly for Microsoft, that it was an acceptable basis to admit survey evidence. [read post]
16 Aug 2009, 11:23 am
The best example of the downside of optionality was the sale of United Rentals Inc. where the buyer, Cerberus, unabashedly chose to pay the break fee rather than close, despite the absence of any material problem in the URI business. [read post]
9 Aug 2009, 2:47 am
(emphasis added) Practical Law Company, Inc.: Creating Efficiency for business lawyers Practical Law Company (PLC) is changing the way business lawyers work. [read post]
7 Aug 2009, 9:42 am
Pfizer, Inc., Et Al. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 9:33 am
Pfizer Inc., 1:07-CV-11426, U.S. [read post]
5 Aug 2009, 5:35 am
(Spicy IP) Coversyl (Perindopril) – Canada: Court of Appeal upholds Trial Division finding of patent validity and infringement: Apotex v ADIR (Pharmacapsules@Gowlings) Cozaar (Losartan) – France: French Patent Office grants paediatric extension of French SPC for Losartan (The SPC Blog) Cozaar/Hyzaar (Losartan) – US: FDA prevails in generic Cozaar/Hyzaar 180-day exclusivity forfeiture litigation: Teva Pharmaceuticals v Sebelius (FDA Law Blog) Diflucan (Fluconazole)… [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 1:04 am
Pfizer Inc., 1:07-cv-11426, U.S. [read post]
22 Jul 2009, 6:00 am
" Drugmakers including New York-based Pfizer Inc. may benefit from an aging population, said Thomas Lee, chief U.S. equity strategist at JPMorgan Chase & Co. in New York. [read post]
21 Jul 2009, 5:00 am
AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a case involving the invocation of inspection rights to investigate the reasons why the board of directors of Axcelis did not accept the resignation of three directors who failed to receive majority support from shareholders voting in the eleciton. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 8:00 am
AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a case involving the invocation of inspection rights to investigate the reasons why the board of directors of Axcelis did not accept the resignation of three directors who failed to receive majority support from shareholders voting in the election. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 5:07 am
Merck & Co., Inc., 192 N.J. 372 (2007), referred to as Vioxx by the district court, the federal court refused to grant class action treatment to the litigation because “Vioxx precludes NJCFA plaintiffs from establishing causation through a report from a single expert, and the instant plaintiffs seek to do exactly that,” id., at 25. [read post]
