Home > Legal Library > Advanced Search > Search Results









Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected



Search Results (672)

  
Documents on Intellectual Property, Pharmaceuticals
 

View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  >>
Show: results per page
Sort by:
Sponsored Results

Adobe PDFCourt Finds Likelihood of Confusion Between 'Fuci-' Marks
Maria Athanassiadou; Dr. Helen Papaconstantinou, John Filias & Associates;
Legal Alert/Article
September 22, 2014, previously published by WTR Daily, part of World Trademark Review on June 2014
In Decision No 4305/2014, the Athens Three-Member Administrative Court of First Instance, Division 25, has reversed a decision of the Administrative Trademark Committee in which the latter had rejected an opposition against the registration of the mark FUCIRICIN. In 2005 Greek company IATOR AE's...

 

HTMLFederal Circuit Finds Apotex ANDAs Do Not Infringe Lysteda Patents
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
September 4, 2014, previously published on September 2, 2014
In two decisions issued under the same name (Ferring B.V. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.), the Federal Circuit upheld the validity of the Orange Book-listed patents for Lysteda®, but found that they were not infringed by either Apotex’s or Watson’s Abbreviated New Drug Applications...

 

HTMLThird Circuit Rejects Presumption of Irreparable Harm in Lanham Act Cases
Jessica D. Bradley, John G. Froemming, Candice M. Reder, Meredith M. Wilkes; Jones Day;
Legal Alert/Article
September 3, 2014, previously published on August 2014
In a precedential decision issued this week, Ferring Pharmaceuticals v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit in rejecting the presumption of irreparable harm for plaintiffs seeking a preliminary injunction in Lanham Act false advertising...

 

HTMLFederal Circuit Upholds Validity of Lysteda Patents
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 29, 2014, previously published on August 28, 2014
In two decisions issued under the same name (Ferring B.V. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.), the Federal Circuit upheld the validity of the Orange Book-listed patents for Lysteda®, but found that they were not infringed by either Apotex’s or Watson’s Abbreviated New Drug Applications...

 

HTMLInvalidity Allegations re Anticipation and Obviousness Found Justified
Adrian J. Howard, Beverley Moore, Chantal Saunders, Ryan Steeves; Borden Ladner Gervais LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 27, 2014, previously published on August 20, 2014
In this case, Apotex sought to enter the market with its generic version of travoprost. The Court dismissed the proceeding on the basis that Apotex’ allegations as to anticipation and obviousness were held to be justified. The Court construed the claims at issue to claim the use of a compound...

 

HTMLSecond Circuit Clarifies the Use of Legal Presumptions of Consumer Confusion and Injury in Certain Lanham Act Cases
Bruce A. Colbath; Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 27, 2014, previously published on August 21, 2014
On Tuesday, July 29, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit “clarified certain aspects of [its] false advertising jurisprudence” and held that, where literal falsity and deliberate deception have been proved in a market with only two players, it is appropriate to use...

 

HTMLAiring the USPTO's Naturally Occurring Dirty Laundry — the Subject Matter Eligibility Stain
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 27, 2014, previously published on August 21, 2014
It has been five months since the USPTO issued its Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural Products to aid examiners in applying the principles of Myriad and Prometheus to any claim “reciting or...

 

HTMLFederal Circuit Upholds Inequitable Conduct Defense Against Apotex Patent
Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff; Foley & Lardner LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 22, 2014, previously published on August 18, 2014
In Apotex Inc. v. UCB, Inc., the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s finding that Apotex’s patent is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. While affirming on the ground of “but-for materiality,” the Federal Circuit noted that the inventor’s conduct...

 

HTMLSham Hatch-Waxman Infringement Suits And FDA Citizen Petitions; A Potential For New Liability For Innovators?
Robert L. Magielnicki; Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 19, 2014, previously published on August 12, 2014
Under what is commonly known as “Noerr-Pennington immunity,” persons exercising their First Amendment right to petition the government for redress are generally immune from antitrust liability, even though their actions may harm competition or competitors. The Supreme Court has...

 

HTMLCauses of Action Found Against Pfizer for a BC Class-Action Certification Based On the VIAGRA® Patent
Adrian J. Howard, Beverley Moore, Chantal Saunders, Ryan Steeves; Borden Ladner Gervais LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
August 19, 2014, previously published on August 14, 2014
Pfizer had a Canadian patent for VIAGRA® that was found to not comply with the disclosure requirement by the Supreme Court in an earlier PM(NOC) proceeding (Teva Canada Ltd. v. Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 SCC 60). This finding was later applied on summary judgment in favour of Apotex (Apotex v....

 


View Page: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  >>