Search for: "Vitro Electronics v. the United States" Results 1 - 12 of 12
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Aug 2020, 7:02 am by Elizabeth McAuliffe (Bristows)
If the skilled person were in the United States, he would seek the assistance of a FAA DER who would be responsible for ensuring compliance with the relevant FAA regulations and guidelines. [read post]
16 Mar 2011, 2:07 pm by FDABlog HPM
  However, the sources of information listed in the regulation has expanded to include “any clinical or epidemiological investigations, animal or in vitro studies, reports in the scientific literature, and unpublished scientific papers, as well as reports from foreign regulatory authorities and reports of foreign commercial marketing experience for drugs that are not marketed in the United States. [read post]
A type of ‘top-down’ approach was relied on in the 2013 US case In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC and the 2014 Japanese case Samsung v Apple Japan (Apple Japan Godo Kaisha v Samsung Electronics Co). [read post]
2 Sep 2017, 9:00 am by Michael H Cohen
Certain electronic radiation emitting products with medical application and claims meet the definition of medical device. [read post]
22 Sep 2021, 9:27 am by Joel R. Brandes
” Here, the court’s determination to deny defendant’s request for attorney’s fees was largely based on its assessment of defendant’s credibility at trial regarding the state of her own finances, her failure to fully account for large sums of money that she had received, and her failure to fully account for assets belonging to plaintiff that she purportedly used for his benefit during the period they were separated. [read post]