Search for: "Davis v. Merck "
Results 1 - 20
of 38
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Sep 2018, 10:17 am
E.g., Davis at 187 tbl.1; see also Dist. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 2:57 am
PREVIOUSLY ON NEVER TOO LATENever too Late 178 [week ending 14 January] A Merck-y appeal is remitted to the High Court | Into fashion law? [read post]
23 Jan 2018, 4:34 am
Edition 178 of Never Too Late is here to recap last week’s highlights here on the IPKat (week ending 14th January)A Merck-y appeal is remitted to the High CourtThe longstanding dispute relating to various issues over the use of the MERCK trade mark is set to continue The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has remitted Merck KGaA v Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 1834 case back to the High Court. [read post]
6 Nov 2015, 6:58 am
This is actually presaged in Teva UK Ltd v Merck & Co Inc [2009] EWHC 2952 (Pat), although in that case the issue did not actually arise.Inventive stepThe inventive step argument was essentially – gabapentin is similar to pregabalin, gabapentin is known for the treatment of pain, so it is obvious that pregabalin would also be effective to treat pain. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 1:11 pm
The Court disagreed, citing SCOTUS’s Wyeth v. [read post]
9 Apr 2015, 9:33 am
”); Johnson & Johnson-Merck Consumer Pharm. [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
Parke, Davis & Co., 256 F.3d 1013, 1021 (10th Cir. 2001) (wrong to “construe [a treater’s] ‘heeding’ an adequate warning to mean [s/he] would have given the warning”) (applying Oklahoma law); In re Diet Drug Litigation, 895 A.2d 480, 490-91 (N.J. [read post]
30 Sep 2014, 9:36 pm
” Warner- Jenkinson Co. v Hilton Davis Chem. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 9:37 pm
Was it really the intention of the Supreme Court to strip away by a side wind protection for future small molecule innovations of the stature of adrenalin (US 730,176; Parke-Davis v Mulford, 189 F. 95, 103 (1911)), digitalis (US 1,898,199), vitamin B12 (US 2,563,794; Merck v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
Emody v. [read post]
5 Jul 2013, 5:00 am
Parke Davis & Co., 520 F.2d 1359, 1362 (4th Cir. 1975). [read post]
9 Aug 2012, 5:00 am
Merck (Vioxx) Trial2006-05-08 Doherty v. [read post]
23 May 2012, 11:45 am
Merck & Co. v. [read post]
28 Oct 2011, 7:00 am
Merck & Co., 2007 WL 5861354, at *3 (C.D. [read post]
31 Jul 2011, 9:28 pm
v. [read post]
2 Jun 2011, 12:46 pm
Parke, Davis & Co., 507 P.2d 653, 660 (Cal. 1973). [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 3:18 pm
Brown v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 2:11 pm
Parke Davis & Co., 374 N.E.2d 683, 688 (Ill. [read post]
2 Sep 2010, 1:36 pm
TOTM readers may recall that I spent some time criticizing the Federal Trade Commission’s complaint, back in 2008, in FTC v. [read post]
17 May 2010, 8:12 am
Swift-Eckrich 11/2/2005 1/23/2006 2.68 Merck v. [read post]