Search for: "APOTEX CORP."
Results 161 - 180
of 333
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Apr 2012, 10:36 am
Apotex Corp., 316 F.3d 1348 (Fed. [read post]
18 Apr 2012, 7:28 pm
Apotex Corp., 316 F.3d 1348 (Fed. [read post]
4 Apr 2012, 8:53 am
Apotex Corp., 439 F.3d 1312, 1320 (Fed. [read post]
14 Mar 2012, 5:04 am
Plaintiff Schering Corp. [read post]
6 Mar 2012, 1:00 am
Apotex Corp., the Federal Circuit held that the district court had jurisdiction over AstraZeneca’s ANDA complaint, but also held that the complaint should be dismissed for failing to state a viable claim for relief because the ANDAs included Section viii... [read post]
4 Mar 2012, 9:02 am
Next year, the Supreme Court’s Daubert decision will turn 20. [read post]
25 Feb 2012, 10:04 am
Corp., 768 F. [read post]
22 Feb 2012, 5:49 pm
Apotex Corp., 316 F.3d 1348 (Fed. [read post]
13 Feb 2012, 1:47 pm
Apotex Corp., 316 F.3d 1348 (Fed. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 12:39 pm
Orange County - Apotex Corp., Canada's largest pharmaceutical manufacturer, has paid Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. and Sanofi SA nearly $445 million in damages to end a decade-long patent infringement lawsuit over Apotex' improper sales of its generic version of Plavix. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 10:56 am
In AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P. v Apotex Corp., the Court held for defendant generic manufacturers on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to state a 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(2) claim based on defendants’ existing ANDA filings, and claims premised on presumed future labeling amendments were not ripe for adjudication. [read post]
10 Feb 2012, 10:56 am
In AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, L.P. v Apotex Corp., the Court held for defendant generic manufacturers on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to state a 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(2) claim based on defendants’ existing ANDA filings, and claims premised on presumed future labeling amendments were not ripe for adjudication. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 3:43 pm
Apotex Corp., the Court held that alleging infringement under 35 U.S.C. [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 7:41 am
Research Corp v. [read post]
8 Dec 2011, 9:50 am
., Ltd.) of Tokyo, Japan, after a bench trial on the plaintiff's patent infringement claims against Apotex, Inc., of Ontario, Canada and Apotex Corp. [read post]
4 Dec 2011, 8:52 pm
• Defendants: Apotex, Inc.; Apotex Corp. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 9:59 pm
., and Bristol-Myers Squibb Sanofi Pharmaceuticals Holding Partnership ("Sanofi"); affirmed the District Court's denial of a motion for leave to file a supplemental answer, affirmative defenses, and counterclaims by Defendants-Appellants Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 10:43 am
Motors Corp. v. [read post]
18 Oct 2011, 8:31 am
Motors Corp. v. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 7:45 pm
Apotex, Inc., 470 F.3d 1368, 1374 (Fed. [read post]
