Search for: "Actavis"
Results 1 - 20
of 1,004
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Apr 2024, 11:27 am
Another multi-district litigation (MDL) has hit a jarring speed bump. [read post]
21 Dec 2023, 9:41 am
Actavis Laby’s UT, Inc., 65 F.4th 679, 692 (Fed. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 7:43 am
Actavis Elizabeth LLC). [read post]
14 Nov 2023, 4:18 am
The judge considered these two differences collectively in determining whether PMI’s product infringed as an equivalent (the approach he endorsed in Regen v Estar[2]) under the 3-step test set out in Actavis v Eli Lilly[3]. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 8:34 pm
Noonan -- A decade ago the Federal Trade Commission engaged in a crusade against reverse settlement payment agreements in ANDA litigation (which they termed, Madison Avenue-like, "pay for delay" settlements), arguing that such agreements were per se antitrust violations, despite almost universal rejection of their position by most Courts of Appeal prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v FTC. [read post]
19 Sep 2023, 8:34 pm
Noonan -- A decade ago the Federal Trade Commission engaged in a crusade against reverse settlement payment agreements in ANDA litigation (which they termed, Madison Avenue-like, "pay for delay" settlements), arguing that such agreements were per se antitrust violations, despite almost universal rejection of their position by most Courts of Appeal prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Actavis v FTC. [read post]
13 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
The Evolution of FTC Antitrust Enforcement – Highlights of Its Origins and Major Trends 1910-1914 – Creation and Launch The election of 1912, which led to the creation of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), occurred at the apex of the Progressive Era. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 1:51 pm
Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 3:44 am
BMS appealed the decision on several grounds (para. 89), mostly relating to whether the High Court had appropriately applied the law on plausibility as established by the UK Supreme Court in Warner-Lambert v Actavis [2018] UKSC 56. [read post]
20 Jul 2023, 1:42 am
The Court of Appeal in Sandoz v BMS attempts to reconcile the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) decision in G 2/21, and the landmark UK Supreme Court decision on plausibility Warner-Lambert v Actavis [2018] UKSC 56. [read post]
10 Jun 2023, 4:02 pm
Darren Smyth (photo: Neil Graveney)The equivalents were a terrible idea, said Darren Smyth commenting on Actavis v Eli Lilly from the UK Supreme Court, which established that an infringed claim could be wider than the claim wording. [read post]
16 May 2023, 7:51 am
The District Court Litigation In March 2019, UCB brought ANDA litigation against Actavis, asserting claims 1-3, 7, and 10-12 of the '589 patent. [read post]
11 May 2023, 2:21 am
Rejecting all four grounds, he confirmed that the Court of Appeal is bound by the majority judgment in Warner-Lambert v Actavis (the Supreme Court’s decision in the pregabalin case). [read post]
15 Apr 2023, 10:27 am
Actavis Lab’ys UT, Inc., 2023 WL 2904757, — 4th — (Fed. [read post]
1 Mar 2023, 1:00 am
Applying the reasoning in Actavis it concluded that Article 3(c) was an obstacle from granting another SPC for the combination of dapagliflozin and metformin (p. 8, last para – p. 9, first para). [read post]
12 Jan 2023, 4:23 pm
Actavis Lab’ys FL, Inc., 2016 WL 4582498, at *2 (D. [read post]
27 Dec 2022, 4:33 pm
Octrooicentrum Nederland (C-484/12) and Actavis v. [read post]
14 Dec 2022, 11:59 pm
In terms of substantive law, I think you can see that trend in the UK’s embracing finally of a doctrine of equivalence – and from the discussion in the Supreme Court’s Actavis decision which was quite clear in its emphasis that a higher degree of European harmonisation in that respect was in itself a valuable objective. [read post]
8 Nov 2022, 1:46 pm
Actavis, 570 U.S. 136 (2013). [read post]
24 Oct 2022, 12:00 am
The Opponent's lack of inventive step arguments in this case were similar to the types of argument successfully employed in the UK courts in, for example, Actavis v ICOS ([2019] USKC 15, IPKat) and Bayer v Teva ([2021] EWHC 2690 (Pat), IPKat). [read post]
