Search for: "Apotex"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,051
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jun 2014, 5:25 pm
., Apotex Corp., Sandoz, Inc., Hit-TechPharmacal Co., Inc., Actavis, Inc., Watson Laboratories,Inc., and Watson Pharma, Inc. [read post]
2 Apr 2015, 9:59 pm
Of course, the Federal Circuit explained this week in the Apotex Inc. v. [read post]
6 Sep 2012, 8:08 am
Apotex had commenced marketing, and proposed to commence sales in September 2012 of generic versions APO-MOMETASONE NASAL SPRAY, APOTEX-MOMETASONE NASAL SPRAY, CHEMMART MOMETASONE NASAL SPRAY, GENRX MOMETASONE NASAL SPRAY and TERRY WHITE CHEMISTS MOMETASONE NASAL SPRAY. [read post]
16 Aug 2016, 5:15 pm
See Apotex Inc.v. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 5:06 pm
Apotex (Fed. [read post]
8 Aug 2006, 9:34 am
RELATED READING: Wall Street Journal Online story about Apotex's launch related Apotex press releases 08-Aug-06 sanofi-aventis press release [read post]
13 Nov 2006, 9:58 pm
Apotex filed a complaint and motion for preliminary injunction against the FDA in the U.S. [read post]
14 Nov 2017, 3:04 pm
Thecourt found that Amgen had failed to prove that Apotex’sproposed commercial marketing of the two products,pursuant to Apotex’s applications, would infringe the ’138patent, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.Amgen appeals. [read post]
26 Nov 2012, 10:19 pm
According to Apotex, Mylan Laboratories Ltd. [read post]
11 Oct 2007, 9:56 pm
Torpharm and Apotex, No. 2007-1019 (Fed. [read post]
15 Apr 2007, 9:46 pm
Apotex, No. 06-230 (D. [read post]
19 Aug 2014, 2:09 pm
Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp. [read post]
8 Sep 2006, 12:15 pm
In its appeal, Apotex claims the court failed to properly consider Apotex's "massive irreparable harm, including the loss of its enormously valuable exclusivity and the great harm to third parties. [read post]
10 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
(Apotex). [read post]
31 Aug 2006, 6:15 pm
Apotex Inc., 02cv2255, U.S. [read post]
11 Oct 2006, 9:01 am
In Apotex v. [read post]
21 Dec 2020, 10:16 am
Apotex, Inc. [read post]
7 Nov 2008, 4:11 am
In a 7-0 judgment on 6 Nov 08, the Canadien Supreme Court rejected a request from Apotex Inc. to invalidate Sanofi's patent for an anti-coagulant drug (Plavix) used to combat cardiovascular degeneration.Coverage by Kirk Makin in the Globe and Mail did NOT get to the heart of this court battle involving patenting of racemates vs. patenting of enantiomers:Judge Rothstein said that in case of Sanofi's anti-coagulant drug - marketed under the name, Plavix - the company showed a clear… [read post]
31 Mar 2011, 2:46 am
Les Laboratoires Servier and another v Apotex Inc and others [2010] EWHC 730 (Pat); [2011] WLR (D) 111 “The court would not award compensation under a cross-undertaking for the loss sustained by an unlawful business or where the beneficiary of the cross-undertaking had to rely to a substantial extent upon his own illegality in order to establish the loss, provided the unlawfulness was sufficiently serious to engage the ex turpi causa rule. [read post]
9 May 2012, 1:52 am
Les Laboratoires Servier and another v Apotex Inc and others [2012] EWCA Civ 593; [2012] WLR (D) 138 “The court was able to take into account a wide range of considerations in order to ensure that the ex turpi causa defence only applied where it was a just and proportionate response to the illegality in question. [read post]
