Search for: "PH v. State" Results 61 - 80 of 199
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
8 May 2012, 3:58 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Secretary of State for the Home Department v Munir and anor, heard 24 – 27 April 2012. [read post]
2 Jul 2017, 12:52 am
 (Eli Lilly v Novopharm (2010 FCA 197)This exercise requires:Reviewing the entire specification (claims and entire disclosure)Identifying the promises made in the entire specification Determining whether the patent fulfils those promises by demonstration or sound prediction.This exercise is a question of law viewed through the skilled person at the time of filing (with the assistance of expert evidence) and has been applied in several cases (BMS v Apotex (2005 FC 1348),… [read post]
1 Jul 2017, 9:39 am
 (Eli Lilly v Novopharm (2010 FCA 197)This exercise requires:Reviewing the entire specification (claims and entire disclosure)Identifying the promises made in the entire specification Determining whether the patent fulfils those promises by demonstration or sound prediction.This exercise is a question of law viewed through the skilled person at the time of filing (with the assistance of expert evidence) and has been applied in several cases (BMS v Apotex (2005 FC 1348),… [read post]
21 May 2012, 6:42 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for the Home Department, heard 14 – 15 May 2012. [read post]
12 Mar 2012, 5:19 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
PP v Secretary of State for the Home Department, (formerly VV [Jordan]), PP v SSHD, W & BB v SSHD and Z, G, U & Y v SSHD, heard 30 – 31 January 2012. [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 8:31 am by Laura Sandwell, Matrix.
On Monday 26 March 2012 are the appeals from the Supreme Court of Mauritius of Dookee  v The State of Mauritius and anor and Sakoor Patel and ors v Anandsing Beenessreesing and Sicom Ltd. [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 7:52 am
This judgment [Hospira UK Ltd v Cubist Pharmaceuticals LLC [2016] EWHC 1285 (Pat) (10 June 2016)] was handed down a little while ago, but this Kat only recently got round to studying it properly, containing as it does decisions relating to three rather different patents. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 9:28 am
However, the Court also states (“superfluously”) that even if this would have been the case the Court’s conclusion would remain the same. [read post]
21 Oct 2014, 12:00 am
It was obvious to use a non-aqueous solution to overcome the issue of the substances being stable at different pH’s. [read post]