Search for: "Edwards v. Arthur Andersen" Results 81 - 100 of 103
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Aug 2008, 2:43 am
– discussion of Washington Post article on Ismed’s efforts to promote follow-on biologics approval pathway: (Patent Baristas), (Patent Docs), US: Congressional fact-finding on follow-on biologics: (Patent Docs), US: David v Monsanto: Biotechnology patent ‘exhaustion’ after Quanta, Supreme Court petition: (Hal Wegner), US: Ulysses Pharmaceuticals announces issuance of patent for novel class of ant [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 7:20 am
High Court Brightens Rule Against Non-Compete PactsIn Edwards v. [read post]
8 Aug 2008, 1:28 am
Arthur Andersen LLP  today and held that employee non-competition agreements are invalid, even if narrowly drawn, unless the agreement falls within a statutory exception. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 10:30 pm
” Based on this interpretation of section 16600, the Court held that the non-compete agreement Arthur Andersen required Edwards to sign was invalid. [read post]
6 Aug 2008, 9:27 pm
Arthur Andersen, LLP will be available tomorrow, August 7, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. on the Court’s website. [read post]
9 May 2008, 12:46 pm
By Sarah Drechsler Oral argument before the California Supreme Court is scheduled for May 27 in the Edwards v. [read post]