Search for: "ACTAVIS"
Results 241 - 260
of 1,005
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2018, 10:59 am
Never Too Late 183 [week ending 18 February] Mr Justice Carr's L'Oreal v RN Ventures decision bristles with warnings on Actavis v Lilly claim interpretation, equivalents and prosecution history (Parts I and II) | Can Wenzhou and cigarette lighters tell us something about why there are IP rights? [read post]
9 Mar 2018, 1:00 am
Recent cases such as Trunki and Actavis v Eli Lilly in the Supreme Court and the CJEU ruling in Specsavers have drawn into focus the relationship between the representation contained on the patent, trade mark and design registers and the scope of protection conferred by those registrations. [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 6:48 am
Following Actavis vs Eli Lilly, is the UK becoming more author-centric? [read post]
3 Mar 2018, 4:02 am
Actavis sought a declaration that it would not infringe if it marketed drugs containing other pemetrexed compounds (for example, with potassium instead of sodium). [read post]
3 Mar 2018, 2:35 am
Jane Lambert Patents Court (Mr Justice Arnold): Generics (UK) Ltd (t/a Mylan) and another v Yeda Research And Development Company Ltd [2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat) (26 Oct 2017) On Wednesday, 28 Feb 2018 I gave a talk to the C5 Pharma and Patent Litigation Conference at the Radisson Blu Hotel in Amsterdam. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 6:38 am
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATENever Too Late 183 [week ending 18 February] Mr Justice Carr's L'Oreal v RN Ventures decision bristles with warnings on Actavis v Lilly claim interpretation, equivalents and prosecution history (Parts I and II) | Can Wenzhou and cigarette lighters tell us something about why there are IP rights? [read post]
22 Feb 2018, 8:55 am
If last year’s Supreme Court case in Actavis v Eli Lilly is to be taken as a guide, the Court may take around three months to make its judgment available. [read post]
21 Feb 2018, 1:48 am
PatentsIn a two-part report, the AmeriKat exfoliates the decision in L'Oreal v RN Ventures [2018] EWHC 173, in which Mr Justice Carr bristles with warnings on Actavis v Lilly claim interpretation, equivalents and prosecution history (Part I and Part II)Can Wenzhou and cigarette lighters tell us something about why there are IP rights? [read post]
18 Feb 2018, 5:38 am
Details as follows:Event: Registration, Notice and Property Definition in IP Law Who: Professor Lionel Bently, University of CambridgeDate: Tuesday, 27 February 2018Time: 5:30PM for 6PMWhere: Bristows LLP, 100 Victoria Embankment, London EC4Y 0DH What: Recent cases in the Supreme Court, such as Trunki and Actavis, as well as CJEU rulings such as Specsavers and Grupo Promer, have refocused attention on the perplexing question of… [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 7:31 am
Accordingly, in light of the third Actavis question, the variant would not be an equivalent. [read post]
17 Feb 2018, 7:30 am
Of interest to readers, the case was run in the Shorter Trial Scheme (see previous Kat post here) and applied recent case law on claim interpretation, validity, infringement and the use of prosecution history following the Supreme Court in Actavis v Lilly.L'Oreal claimed that certain products in RN Venture's range of Magnitone devices infringed its patent - EP(UK) 1 722 699 - and Community Registered Designs - RCD Nos 000407747-001 and 001175046-001. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 2:33 am
EssaysWas the Supreme Court right in Actavis v Eli Lilly to introduce a doctrine of equivalents when determining infringement of patents in the UK? [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 12:54 pm
Actavis decision, which concluded that certain "reverse payment" pharmaceutical patent litigation settlements could violate the antitrust laws and that "it is normally not necessary to litigate patent validity to answer the antitrust question. [read post]
8 Feb 2018, 12:54 pm
Actavis decision, which concluded that certain "reverse payment" pharmaceutical patent litigation settlements could violate the antitrust laws and that "it is normally not necessary to litigate patent validity to answer the antitrust question. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
The UCL debate on the UK Supreme Court decision Actavis v Eli Lilly ("Equivalents: K = Na. [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 4:34 am
This is one instance in which joint contribution was exactly that, at least for a while.French Supreme Court in Finasteride second-medical use litigation acknowledges patentability of dosage regime claimsAnnsley Merelle Ward delves into the analysis of the French Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on sufficiency of disclosure, second medical use and dosage regime claims in the battle between MSD and Teva and Actavis concerning Propecia (finasteride).Alibaba released the 2017 Annual… [read post]
19 Jan 2018, 3:58 am
Readers interested in patent law will be familiar with last summer's decision of the UK Supreme Court in Actavis v Eli Lilly [2017] UKSC 48. [read post]
16 Jan 2018, 2:15 am
Notwithstanding the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Actavis v Eli Lilly, there was no dispute between the parties about the correct principles to apply to construction of patent claims, being that set out in the Court of Appeal’s pre-Actavis judgment in Virgin Atlantic v Premium Aircraft (which had been accepted by the judge at first instance). [read post]
11 Jan 2018, 2:25 am
"The Actavis decision can be found here (in French) and here (in English). [read post]
7 Jan 2018, 12:47 pm
Actavis regarding the infringement by equivalent means of Eli Lilly’s patent EP 1 313 508 (not only because the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Federal Patent Court and we can therefore expect a new decision in this matter in 2018). [read post]
