Search for: "Eli Lilly "
Results 1961 - 1980
of 2,131
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 May 2017, 1:00 am
Eli Lilly & Co v Actavis UK Ltd & Ors, heard 4-6 Apr 2017. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 12:33 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 736 F.Supp.2d 219, 222-23 (D.D.C. 2010); White v. [read post]
25 Mar 2011, 11:43 am
See Eli Lilly, 251 F.3d at 962. [read post]
14 Mar 2012, 8:57 am
A stellar cast of corporations, including those who create their own IP and those who thrive by using the IP of others, is attending: BAE Systems, Boeing Company, Caterpillar, Colgate-Palmolive [will they give a speakers a pasting, wonders Merpel], Eli Lilly, Hitachi, IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Mastercard, Microsoft, NASA, Pfizer,Rambus, Teva, and many more, too numerous to sue list. [read post]
4 Jan 2012, 9:20 am
Takeda and Eli Lilly & Company jointly promoted Actos in the United States since its launch in 1999; however as of 2006, Takeda solely assumed all marketing and sales responsibilities for Actos. [read post]
28 Apr 2024, 11:33 am
There was a good bit of irony in Egilman’s reaching out to me to help him prepare for my deposition of him in a silicone gel breast implant case. [read post]
5 Apr 2016, 6:32 am
It concerns Eli Lilly's patent with Swiss-type claims to the use of pemetrexed disodium and Vitamin B12 for the treatment of cancer. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 3:22 pm
In fact in the early nineties, parent, Eli Lilly suffered from its sown problems, such as expiring patents for revenue generating drugs, and a general failure to keep pace with its competitors. [read post]
29 May 2014, 5:00 am
April 11, 2002); Lillie v. [read post]
19 Sep 2013, 9:53 am
The following post is exclusively the work of the Reed Smith side of the blog.Sometimes the smallest, least significant type of lawsuit can illustrate cracks in the edifice of the largest, most consequential litigation. [read post]
31 Jul 2018, 7:58 am
The ruling of the CJEU brings to mind the test proposed by Warren J. in Eli Lilly v Human Genom Sciences [2014] EWHC 2404 (Pat) (18 July 2014)). [read post]
7 Aug 2019, 1:42 am
The IPCom guidance are provided for readers' convenience at the end of this post.The IPCom factors have since been applied in Actavis v Pharmacia [2014] EWHC 2265 (stay was ordered), and Eli Lilly v Janssen Sciences [2016] EWHC 313 (stay was not ordered) (IPKat post here).David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge), applied the IPCom guidance to the fact of the case in Coloplast v Salts. [read post]
4 Aug 2015, 11:27 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1344 (Fed. [read post]
30 Oct 2013, 8:32 am
Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. [read post]
13 Nov 2014, 5:00 am
Eli Lilly & Co., ___ F. [read post]
15 Jun 2014, 6:18 pm
Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 1:16 pm
Eli Lilly and Co., slip op., Case No. 2:13-CV-35-WKW (M.D. [read post]
2 Jun 2014, 4:43 am
We start June with a fabulous two-fer: yes, that is two cases discussed in the same post. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 5:50 am
First panel discussion: Pros and Cons of Different Patent Litigation Systems in Europe The first panel was composed of Ivan Burnside (Eli Lilly), George Moore (Mylan) and Clemens Heusch (Nokia) giving their personal in-house counsel perspectives on different patent litigation systems based on their experience with parallel cases in many European jurisdictions.One of the key points to emerge from this discussion was that judges must be educated by appropriate experts in the… [read post]
7 Dec 2014, 3:29 pm
Among the significant –- but, really, very-well indexed –- number of issues, the decision delves into novelty, inventive step, insufficiency by excessive claim breadth, added matter, and claim construction in light of the influential Actavis v Eli Lilly, another Arnoldian decision that the very same judge clarifies further in this ruling. [read post]
