Search for: "Janssen Research " Results 181 - 200 of 202
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Apr 2017, 1:00 am by Thorsten Bausch
Thus, “early certainty” is likely to be detrimental to innovation and furthering research, at least for several years to come. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 2:30 am by Kluwer UPC News blogger
According to research of IP Kat, and ‘if there are no further delays or unexpected hurdles, (…) it may be that the UK may have ratified the UPC by end of November/early December 2017’. [read post]
2 Sep 2015, 8:19 am by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
  So in the past we have seen drugs rushed on to the market without the internal research necessary to make sure they are safe. [read post]
29 Aug 2016, 1:19 pm by Michael Grossman
Risperdal is the name Janssen patented and used when marketing the product. [read post]
24 Apr 2013, 8:31 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  The only current solution is research at the chambers level. [read post]
4 May 2011, 7:52 am by Tron Emptage
Barry Lipton, Chris Laws and Linda Li, “Narcotics in Workers Compensation,” NCCI Research Brief, December 2009 p.5. 8. [read post]
5 Jan 2018, 12:00 pm by Tom Lamb
Categories: SGLT-2 Inhibitors Diabetes Drugs Hepatitis C Treatment Drugs Anticoagulants / Bloodthinners Breast Implants Osteoporosis Treatment Drugs Erectile Dysfunction (ED) Drugs Heartburn / Acid Reflux Drugs Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Treatment Drugs DPP-4 Inhibitors Diabetes Drugs Miscellaneous   SGLT-2 Inhibitors Diabetes Drugs: Jardiance - Amputations Drug Safety Issue Remains Uncertain Due To Admitted "inherent limitations of... post hoc analyses" (11/28/17) Medical… [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:39 am
Merck argued: * the claims are excessively broad, because they cover any and all types of cancer but the specification does not make it plausible that all cancers can be treated by an anti-PD-1 antibody* the patent is not an enabling disclosure of an anti-PD-1 antibody which is suitable to treat all cancers--the most it does is set an unduly burdensome research project to find one* the patent does not disclose a pri [read post]
12 Apr 2007, 1:33 am
"More likely than not" seems to us to be farther away from the actual comfort level that professionals need before making a decision than the existing "reasonable professional certainty" standard.According to the Reporter's Notes (pp. 135-36), somebody did some ad hoc research among some doctors and scientists attending a recent medico-legal conference (not necessarily a representative sampling, we suspect, given the setting) by eliciting criticism of the… [read post]
18 Nov 2016, 12:44 am by John Collins
  The need to undertake further research would amount to an “undue burden” being placed on the skilled addressee. [read post]
13 May 2010, 12:27 pm by Bexis
Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., 288 Fed. [read post]
11 Dec 2018, 11:18 am by Howard Knopf
(’s will be back in the Federal Court tomorrow on December 12, 2018 at 90 Sparks St. in Ottawa at 9:30 AM with a “mega” motion record of almost 3,000 pages. [read post]
25 Jan 2017, 10:48 pm
  Birss J agreed with Floyd J in Actavis v Janssen [2008] EWHC 1422 (Pat) that the presence of another fairly remote possibility did not preclude a finding of “inevitable result”. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 6:36 am
“Jurisfiction” is a word coined by Jasper Fforde, author of the Tuesday Next series, one of the more sophisticated set of children’s works that has come to populate this post-Harry Potter era. [read post]
24 Jun 2010, 5:00 am by Bexis
Accufix Research Institute, Inc., 253 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir. [read post]
1 Oct 2009, 2:14 am
We've done so many posts on removal - for you non-lawyers that means moving cases that were originally filed in state court into federal court - that even we have a hard time keeping track. [read post]