Search for: "Succession of Doll v. Doll" Results 1 - 20 of 89
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
13 Apr 2024, 3:33 pm by admin
Prelude to Litigation Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) was a widely used direct α-adrenergic agonist used as a medication to control cold symptoms and to suppress appetite for weight loss.[1] In 1972, an over-the-counter (OTC) Advisory Review Panel considered the safety and efficacy of PPA-containing nasal decongestant medications, leading, in 1976, to a recommendation that the agency label these medications as “generally recognized as safe and effective. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 4:57 pm by INFORRM
“Although the point was not argued before me, there was a significant possibility that a robustly argued application might have been successful. [read post]
8 Jul 2023, 11:41 pm by Aaron Moss
A Matter of Perspective As another example, consider Steinberg v. [read post]
28 Jun 2022, 7:13 am by admin
Sir Richard’s 2002 paper is in a sense a scientific autobiography about some successes in discerning causal associations from observational studies. [read post]
4 Oct 2021, 10:58 am by Rebecca Tushnet
Second big theme is harm and its relationship to the scope of TM rights: Likely success on the merits, or success on the merits, now justifies a presumption of irreparable harm for preliminary or permanent injunctive relief, restoring the rule that many circuits used before eBay v Mercexchange, though the knowledge of this change is percolating through the lower courts. [read post]
16 Mar 2021, 5:55 am by Robert B. Milligan and Meghan McBerry
Factual Background In early 2014, Plaintiff TFHU, a toy-inventing nonprofit, learned that defendant Mattel, a highly successful toy manufacturer, was looking to develop a new version of its “Barbie” brand doll that would include a mechanism for Barbie to fly. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
The key study was conducted by Sir Richard Doll in 1955, which showed the association but only among those who had been overexposed in the early years of the manufacturing plant.[9] There was no causal inference claimed, and Doll had not controlled for smoking histories. [read post]