Search for: "Eli Lilly "
Results 1801 - 1820
of 2,131
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2018, 2:17 am
| Book Review: Kerly’s Law of Trade Marks and Trade Names | Thursday Thingies | Around the IP BlogsNever Too Late 204 [Week ending 28 Oct]Court of Appeal reaffirms UK as SEP litigation hotspot in upholding Birss J in Unwired Planet | Much Ado About FRAND: What you need to know about today's Court of Appeal Unwired Planet decision | AIPPI UK Rapid Response Event: Unwired Planet v Huawei - 13 November at 6PM | Lord Kitchin applies the "markedly different" infringement… [read post]
14 Aug 2014, 2:23 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 744 F.2d 213, 216 (1st Cir. 1984), more appropriate. [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 12:43 am
| BEAUTY & THE BAY not an infringement of BEAUTY BAY, says High Court | US copyright registration for the Tommy Hilfiger Flag denied due to insufficient originality | The reemergence of issues surrounding copyright and the Australian Aboriginal Flag… | Gigi Hadid, Smile for the Copyright | Eli Lilly v Fresenius Kabi: a decision far from equivalent to what has been decided before | Re-establishment: An isolated error in a well-functioning system may not be equivalent to… [read post]
27 Nov 2018, 3:19 am
Image Credits: In NYCPREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATENever Too Late 204 [Week ending 28 Oct] Court of Appeal reaffirms UK as SEP litigation hotspot in upholding Birss J in Unwired Planet | Much Ado About FRAND: What you need to know about today's Court of Appeal Unwired Planet decision | AIPPI UK Rapid Response Event: Unwired Planet v Huawei - 13 November at 6PM | Lord Kitchin applies the "markedly different" infringement approach in Actavis v Eli Lilly in… [read post]
15 Apr 2021, 9:57 am
Samsung, Eli Lilly v. [read post]
13 Aug 2019, 6:03 am
| BEAUTY & THE BAY not an infringement of BEAUTY BAY, says High Court | US copyright registration for the Tommy Hilfiger Flag denied due to insufficient originality | The reemergence of issues surrounding copyright and the Australian Aboriginal Flag… | Gigi Hadid, Smile for the Copyright | Eli Lilly v Fresenius Kabi: a decision far from equivalent to what has been decided before | Re-establishment: An isolated error in a well-functioning system may not be equivalent to… [read post]
20 Feb 2016, 12:30 pm
Peter Yu, The Investment-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights: Eli Lilly’s $500 million complaint against Canadian gov’t; challenges against plain packaging by tobacco companies. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 3:32 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. [read post]
1 Jun 2018, 12:13 pm
Eli Lilly & Co. v. [read post]
1 Mar 2013, 11:56 am
Eli Lilly and CompanyCase number: 12-cv-2045 (United States District Court for the District of Columbia)Case filed: December 20, 2012Qualifying judgment/order: January 2, 2013 02/08/2013 05/09/2013 2013-13 SEC v. [read post]
6 Oct 2015, 12:04 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 2015 U.S. [read post]
13 Oct 2015, 11:42 am
Thierry Calame (Lenz & Staehelin), the Committee's Co-Chair, lead the panel session with an expert panel including Judge Meier-Beck (Presiding Judge of the German Federal Court of Justice), Larry Welch (Eli Lilly), Tina Chappell (Intel) and Michael Frohlich. [read post]
22 Mar 2007, 5:34 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 549 N.Y.S.2d 654, 658-60 (N.Y. [read post]
12 Nov 2009, 9:17 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 66 Fed. [read post]
18 Oct 2007, 10:33 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., No. 91-02496-A (Tex. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 12:49 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 751 P.2d 923 (Cal. 1988). [read post]
3 Apr 2008, 7:27 am
Eli Lilly & Co., ___ F. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 11:35 am
Big pharma players such as Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Allergan are committed to voluntary price restraints, while companies such as Novartis and Roche are in favor of value-based pricing. [read post]
9 Jun 2011, 10:02 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 2009 WL 5216930, at *12 (E.D.N.Y. [read post]
20 May 2012, 1:11 pm
On the face of it, Plavix's patent expiry may have arguably paved the way for Eli Lilly & Co's and AstraZeneca's own blood-thinning drugs, Effient and Brilinta respectively, to gain more market share but the expiry of the patent does not mean that increasing the market share of their competitor drugs will be easy. [read post]
