Search for: "L. V. et al v. Pfizer, Inc. et al" Results 1 - 20 of 33
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Dec 2021, 1:29 pm by Kevin LaCroix
  There, the court addressed coverage under Pfizer’s 2004-2005 insurance tower for an underlying securities class action, Morabito, et. al v. [read post]
13 Jul 2021, 10:58 am by Simon Lester
In the United States (US), as for most developed countries,[6] trade policy and IP standards have consistently been linked, a pattern which can (at least partially) be traced back to extensive lobbying by senior management at US-based technology and pharmaceutical firms.[7] For example, since at least the 1980s, Pfizer Inc. has been involved in mobilizing other US firms and stakeholders to lobby US policymakers on the issue of international IP protection. [read post]
23 Jan 2020, 10:37 pm by Schachtman
The phosphodiesterases 5 inhibitor medications (PDE5i) seem to arouse the litigation propensities of the lawsuit industry. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 3:34 am
 Never Too Late 70 [week ending on Sunday 1 November] –  Case T-309/13 Enosi Mastichoparagogon Chiou v OHIM, Gaba International Holding GmbH | Sixteen millions IPKats | Tomaydo-Tomahhdo LLC v George Vozray et al | Lookalike packaging | Parasite copying | 3D printing | Labouring the point? [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am by Schachtman
See also Manual at 614 n. 198., citing Ofer Shpilberg, et al., The Next Stage: Molecular Epidemiology, 50 J. [read post]
5 Jun 2013, 5:29 am by Schachtman
Shaw Envt’l & Infrastructure, Inc., No. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am by W.F. Casey Ebsary, Jr.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued October 16, 2012 Decided January 22, 2013 No. 11-1265 AMERICANS FOR SAFE ACCESS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am by W.F. Casey Ebsary, Jr.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued October 16, 2012 Decided January 22, 2013 No. 11-1265 AMERICANS FOR SAFE ACCESS, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. [read post]
3 Mar 2012, 5:36 pm by Schachtman
Minn. 2008)(noting that some but not all courts have concluded relative risks under two support finding expert witness’s opinion to be inadmissible) XYZ, et al. v. [read post]
17 May 2011, 10:37 pm
WO 01/08661 to Maloney ("Maloney"), both alone and in combination with United States Patent No. 5,047,248 to Calanchi et al. [read post]