Search for: "United States v. Abbott Laboratories"
Results 21 - 40
of 151
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Mar 2019, 11:00 pm
The underlying suit was based on Abbott's belief that the defendants were importing, advertising, and subsequently distributing boxes of Abbott's international test strips in the United States. [read post]
9 Nov 2018, 5:31 am
Mazzo executed a nondisclosure agreement with Abbott Laboratories, Inc. while that firm was exploring its acquisition of AMO. [read post]
17 Sep 2018, 9:30 pm
As is well known, pre-enforcement review of rules was not recognized as an option in other APA proceedings until 1967, when the Supreme Court decided Abbott Laboratories v. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:04 pm
" United Nuclear Corp v. [read post]
14 Jan 2018, 6:34 am
Abbott Laboratories, 26 Cal.3d at p. 611.) [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 5:59 am
Abbott Laboratories and AbbVie Inc. [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 5:47 pm
"from FTC v. [read post]
24 May 2017, 8:36 am
ABBOTT LABORATORIES – United States District Court – Eastern District of new York – May 22nd, 2017) involves the drug Depakote. [read post]
24 May 2017, 8:36 am
ABBOTT LABORATORIES – United States District Court – Eastern District of new York – May 22nd, 2017) involves the drug Depakote. [read post]
18 Jan 2017, 10:54 am
Abbott Laboratories Inc. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 10:48 am
On one hand, United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
31 Dec 2015, 5:12 am
Sanofi-Aventis United States LLP, 806 F.3d 71 (2d Cir. 2015). [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 4:00 am
If the Canadian patent office requires that a divisional application be filed pursuant to Section 36(2.1) of the Patent Act, a court has held that it would “be unfair and inequitable” (see Abbott Laboratories v. [read post]
13 Aug 2015, 10:56 am
Forest Laboratories, a case from the Lexapro MDL, the court agreed with defendant’s argument that per Bartlett, the United States Supreme Court has held that design defect claims involving pharmaceutical products are preempted. [read post]
2 Jul 2015, 12:06 pm
United States , 213F.3d 1366, 1370 (Fed. [read post]
5 Jun 2015, 6:40 am
Abbott Laboratories, 740 F.3d 471 (9th Cir. 2014). [read post]
7 Nov 2014, 5:52 am
By our count, federal judges have trampled over state sovereignty with respect to the heeding presumption in no fewer than eleven states – Alaska, Colorado (despite contrary state-court authority), Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New York (despite contrary state-court authority), South Dakota, and Wyoming.Finally, because various states have taken quite different approaches to whether a heeding presumption exists at all and… [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 2:30 pm
United States, No. 14-233C (2014) involved a Defense Health Agency procurement for self-monitoring blood glucose strips. [read post]
18 Jul 2014, 11:55 am
June. 13, 2013), holding essentially that, since those meanies on the United States Supreme Court aren’t letting plaintiffs sue generic manufacturers, we’ll change Alabama common law and let them sue someone else. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 4:00 am
Abbott Laboratories, (9th Cir., June 24, 2014), the court reported that the call for en banc review did not receive a majority vote. [read post]
