Search for: "ACTAVIS" Results 1 - 20 of 922
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jul 2020, 5:43 am by Annsley Merelle Ward
  Members shared stories of their committed work on advocating for considered and balanced legislation and judicial outcomes on issues including:  criminal sanctions on design right infringement, experimental use exceptions and patent infringement, the role of IP infringement and the Hague Convention, the interface of competition law under the Competition Act 1998 and the Patents Act, the passing of the IP Bill, Brexit, their input into the relaunch of the IPEC, references to their work in… [read post]
5 Jun 2020, 7:00 am by Andrew Hamm
The petitions of the week are below the jump: Actavis Holdco U.S. [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 5:24 am by Lawrence B. Ebert
., and Sun PharmaGlobal FZE’s (collectively, Sun); Teva PharmaceuticalsUSA, Inc. and Actavis Elizabeth LLC’s; and ArgentumPharmaceuticals LLC’s requests for joinder under 35U.S.C. [read post]
11 Apr 2020, 8:30 pm by Patent Docs
Amanda Simons and Ravi Srinivasan of J A Kemp will consider the law surrounding dosage patents at the EPO and in the UK and the strategic questions which are raised by the Actavis v ICOS decision, and also look at how this issue is dealt with in other jurisdictions. [read post]
2 Apr 2020, 2:58 am by Frantzeska Papadopoulou
The “Black Book”, as it is widely known, is a comprehensive commentary to the Patents Act and the last edition  not only provides  updates but also includes substantial revisions of key parts that have been affected by the recent case-law, such as Eli Lily v Actavis, Generics (UK) v Warner-Lambert, Actavis v ICOS and Shanks v Unilever. [read post]
Actavis, 570 U.S. 136 (2013) (finding that so-called “reverse” settlement agreements between pharmaceutical manufacturers may be subject to antitrust scrutiny when certain conditions are satisfied); (2) even if such settlements are subject to antitrust scrutiny, it is improper to apply an “inherently suspect” or “quick look” competitive analysis, rather than a full rule-of-reason analysis to assess anticompetitive effects; and (3) the Commissioners failed… [read post]
Actavis, 570 U.S. 136 (2013) (finding that so-called “reverse” settlement agreements between pharmaceutical manufacturers may be subject to antitrust scrutiny when certain conditions are satisfied); (2) even if such settlements are subject to antitrust scrutiny, it is improper to apply an “inherently suspect” or “quick look” competitive analysis, rather than a full rule-of-reason analysis to assess anticompetitive effects; and (3) the Commissioners failed… [read post]
12 Mar 2020, 1:48 am by Sophie Corke
Katherine Moggridge presenting Katherine Moggridge(Three New Square), who acted on behalf of appellants ICOS, discussed Actavis v ICOS, the most recent case in the UK Supreme Court to address obviousness. [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 3:19 pm by Dennis Crouch
Actavis UK Ltd v Eli Lilly and Co [2017] UKSC 48 (Lord Kitchin JSC). [read post]
9 Mar 2020, 4:03 am by Edith Roberts
’” At the Washington Legal Foundation’s Legal Pulse blog, Glenn Lammi urges the court to review Actavis Holdco, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 9:58 pm by Patent Docs
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., denying a petition for rehearing en banc filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants HZNP Finance Ltd. and Horizon Therapeutics USA, Inc. [read post]
26 Feb 2020, 2:58 am
 The use of the antibody to treat psoriasis was found to lack plausibility at the priority date, applying the principles of Warner-Lamber v Actavis ([2018] UKSC 56). [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 9:03 am by IPWatchdog
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., with Judges Newman, O’Malley, Stoll and Lourie dissenting. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 9:03 am by IPWatchdog
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., with Judges Newman, O’Malley, Stoll and Lourie dissenting. [read post]
25 Feb 2020, 9:03 am by Stone Law, P.C.
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., with Judges Newman, O’Malley, Stoll and Lourie dissenting. [read post]
7 Feb 2020, 12:43 am
Topics will include, amongst others: the implications of non-obviousness for follow-on medical innovation (e.g. drug repurposing) after the UK Supreme Court's 2019 decision in Actavis v ICOS; the current and future roles of competition law in controlling drug prices, including an update on Flynn and Pfizer; and the potential effect of Brexit on the trade of medical products. [read post]
29 Jan 2020, 1:31 am by Kurt R. Karst
Actavis, and the delicate balance between innovation and competition that Congress established in the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and Biologic Price Competition and Innovation Act. [read post]