We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 2,494

Pfizer case shows protecting your own position isn't anti-competitive

  • Clayton Utz
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • March 2 2015

Commercial strategies and practices used by Pfizer to counter the expected loss of revenue caused by the expiry of its patent over Lipitor, its

ACCC v Pfizer judgment summary and ramifications

  • Piper Alderman
  • -
  • Australia
  • -
  • February 27 2015

On 25 February 2015, Justice Flick of the Federal Court of Australia ruled in favour of Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd (Pfizer), dismissing the Australian

IP court interprets scope of Bolar exemption

  • Gün Avukatlık Bürosu
  • -
  • Turkey
  • -
  • February 25 2015

A global pharmaceutical company filed a patent infringement action against a local generic pharmaceutical company on the grounds that the generic

The CJEU on the interpretation of the Specific Mechanism

  • Clifford Chance LLP
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • February 24 2015

Introduction On 12 February 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") delivered its decision in Merck Canada v Sigma Pharmaceuticals

Spineology sues Wright Medical Technology

  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 23 2015

Spineology, Inc. sued Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Wright Medical) in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota

Final decision in NuVasive’s inter partes review of Warsaw Orthopedic patent

  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 23 2015

The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (the "Board") recently issued Final Written Decisions disposing of two inter partes reviews that NuVasive filed in

Chemical-pharmaceutical patent applications filed during the period in which an EPC reservation was in force: has Supreme Court case law become obsolete?

  • Gómez-Acebo & Pombo Abogados
  • -
  • Spain
  • -
  • February 23 2015

Following the recent judgment no. 3382014 of the Barcelona ‘Audiencia Provincial’ (Fifteenth Chamber) of 22 October, this paper examines the case

Application for an order of prohibition is dismissed for a unit dose patent

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 23 2015

The Court found that Mylan’s allegations of lack of utility, anticipation and obviousness were justified. As a result, the application was dismissed

Application for an order of prohibition is dismissed

  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • February 23 2015

The Court found that Teva’s allegation of obviousness was justified. As a result, the application was dismissed

Patentes químico-farmacéuticas solicitadas estando vigente la reserva del CPE: ha quedado obsoleta la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo?

  • Gómez-Acebo & Pombo Abogados
  • -
  • Spain
  • -
  • February 23 2015

Al hilo de la reciente Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Barcelona (Sección 15.ª) núm. 3382014, de 22 de octubre, en el presente documento se