Search for: "Warner-Lambert Company"
Results 101 - 120
of 217
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Mar 2015, 1:55 am
Our guidance is that, because of Warner-Lambert's patent rights:1. [read post]
2 Mar 2015, 2:43 pm
. * Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 3: a "lyrical" solution to a painful patent disputeAfter the Patents Court ruling of Mr Justice Arnold in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others, which Darren reported here, Jeremy has got some news to break on that painful patent war.* Blind faith not enough when proving bad faith: a case of ColourblindnessValentina reports on a fresh trade mark dispute that the General Court has just… [read post]
28 Feb 2015, 4:26 am
Australia’s competition watchdog has failed to convince a Federal Court judge that a strategy employed by pharmaceutical company Pfizer, to enter the market for generic products upon expiry of its patent covering blockbuster cholesterol-lowering drug LIPITOR, constituted an illegal misuse of market power, or ‘exclusive dealing’: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 113.From the year 2000, when it acquired Warner… [read post]
26 Feb 2015, 3:41 pm
This blogpost reported the Patents Court ruling of Mr Justice Arnold in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat). [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 2:55 am
Never too late 32 [week ending Sunday 8 February] –- Brazilian PTO’s delays | The Research Handbook on International Intellectual Property reviewed | Laura Smith-Hewitt | IP, women and leadership: the poll responses | Decline of West’s trust in innovation | Wikipedia public domain photos |CJEU in Case C-383/12 P Environmental Manufacturing LLP v OHIM | The Nordic IP Forum | The future of EPO’s BoA… [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 1:44 am
***** PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATE Never too late 32 [week ending Sunday 8 February] –- Brazilian PTO’s delays | The Research Handbook on International Intellectual Property reviewed | Laura Smith-Hewitt | IP, women and leadership: the poll responses | Decline of West’s trust in innovation | Wikipedia public domain photos |CJEU in Case C-383/12 P Environmental Manufacturing LLP v OHIM | The Nordic IP Forum |… [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 1:15 am
* Warner-Lambert v Actavis Mark 2, still at first instance: more on Swiss claims, Skinny Labels, and no StrikeoutDarren covers another Arnoldian decision in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 223 (Pat). [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 6:31 am
This Kat posted last month on the fascinating case of Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat), in which Arnold J gave the first detailed UK consideration of what a Swiss-form claim means. [read post]
2 Feb 2015, 2:20 am
******************************PREVIOUSLY, ON NEVER TOO LATENever too late 30 [week ending Sunday 18 January] -- Julia Reda’s EU copyright revolution | GC on trade-marketing bottle shapes in (T-69/14 and T-70/14) | IPKat and BLACA’s event on Sensory copyright | IP Cross-Border Enforcement | US Supreme Court in Teva v Sandoz | On-line copyright infringement in Spain | GC on the ‘Pianissimo’ trade mark for vacuum cleaners in Case… [read post]
28 Jan 2015, 1:02 am
In Warner -Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF and Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat) (21 Jan 2015) Warner-Lambert LLC applied to Mr Justice Arnold for an interim injunction in the following terms: "1, The Defendants: (a) shall make it a condition of any oral or written agreement entered into with a pharmacy for the supply of Lecaent that the pharmacy shall use reasonable [read post]
26 Jan 2015, 4:03 am
.* No pain for Actavis: Warner-Lambert fail to stop launch of generic pregabalinSecond medical use claims, skinny labels, and public policy issues around healthcare are the topics addressed in Warner-Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat) (21 January 2015), a decision that Mr Justice Arnold has just delivered and on which Darren timely comments in this post.* BREAKING NEWS: CJEU says exhaustion only… [read post]
21 Jan 2015, 1:35 pm
In a decision that is only moderately Arnoldian (139 paragraphs), Mr Justice Arnold refused today to grant an interim injunction that Warner Lambert had requested against Actavis [Warner -Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Ptc EHF & Others [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat) (21 January 2015)]. [read post]
22 Apr 2014, 11:29 pm
”(emphasis added) (citing Warner-Lambert, 316 F.3d at1354–55). [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 1:53 pm
In January 2014, the United States Supreme Court refused to scrutinize the First Circuit’s decision in In re Neurontin Marketing, which ruled that Pfizer subsidiary Warner-Lambert violated the civil Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statute by improperly marketing the epilepsy drug Neurontin to Kaiser Foundation Health Plan. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 12:41 pm
But, recognizing the primacy of federal law in this field, the Illinois statute itself protects companies from liability if their actions are authorized by federal law.Id. at 941. [read post]
29 Jul 2013, 2:24 am
As recited in the judgment, in 2010 Teva engaged in correspondence with Warner-Lambert stating that it intended to launch generic atorvastatin in November 2011 (after the expiry of the relevant SPC) but then "surreptitiously launched the product on a very large scale in June 2011, before expiry, and without any notice to the patentee." [read post]
17 May 2013, 10:55 am
In December 1996, Parke-Davis Pharmaceutical Research, a division of Warner-Lambert Company, obtained FDA approval to market Lipitor. [read post]
8 Apr 2013, 9:26 pm
Kaiser alleged that Pfizer and its subdivision Warner-Lambert Company, LLC violated the federal RICO law and the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) by fraudulent marketing Neurontin for off-label uses. [read post]
10 Sep 2012, 2:07 pm
Warner-Lambert & Co., 467 F.3d 85, 94 (2d Cir. 2006)). [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 1:57 am
The case is Dr Reddy's Laboratories (UK) Ltd and another company v Warner-Lambert Company LLC [2012] EWHC 1719 (Ch), a Patents Court, England and Wales, decision of Mr Justice Roth of 28 June in relation to a dispute which arose over atorvastatin, a popular pharma product distributed in the UK by Pfizer (Warner Lambert being part of the Pfizer group of companies: the defendant was referred to as 'Pfizer'… [read post]
