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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 185

Generics v Lundbeck - distinguishing the sufficiency requirements for product and process claims
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • May 19 2008

In Generics v Lundbeck, the Court of Appeal provided important guidance on the judgment of the House of Lords in Biogen v Medeva regarding the scope of protection to which an inventor is entitled and the enabling disclosure the specification must provide to support the claims in the patent


Celgene v. Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • June 24 2009

Celgene is the current owner of several patents relating to thalidomide


Immunex Corporation v. Canada (Minister of Health)
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • February 9 2009

The Court upheld the Minister's refusal to list the patent on the Patent Register on the basis that it did not contain a claim for the dosage form


Astrazeneca v. Apotex, interlocutory motion to strike affidavit in PMNOC Regulations case
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • May 21 2010

This was an appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) of the decision of Justice Hughes refusing to strike an affidavit from the record


Pfizer v Ranbaxy; 55.2 proceeding; October 5, 2007 - atorvastatin
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • October 25 2007

The trial judge granted prohibition in respect of one patent claiming a novel crystalline form of atorvastatin (the "crystalline form patent") and denied prohibition in respect of another patent claiming a novel process for making atorvastatin (the "process patent"


Lessons on chemical classes
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • November 12 2008

In July this year, Wragge & Co's Intellectual Property team reported on the German Appeal Court decision on Eli Lilly's patent for the anti-psychotic drug olanzapine


Arrow hits a bullseye against Merck’s divisional patent applications
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • August 20 2007

This is a dispute between Arrow Generics Limited (“Arrow”) and Merck & Co. Inc (“Merck”


Merck triumphs as new and inventive dosing regimen held patentable
  • Gowling WLG
  • United Kingdom
  • May 29 2008

Actavis sued to revoke Merck's patent with a second medical use claim (in the so-called 'Swiss form') for the use of finasteride in the preparation for a drug to treat androgenic alopecia with a lower dosage than disclosed in the prior art


Data protection: defining innovative drug in Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • April 22 2013

Canada amended its Data Protection Regulations in 2006 to provide protection for innovative drugs in a second attempt to implement Canada's 1994


Apotex v. Canada (Minister of Health)
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • May 28 2009

Apotex brought a judicial review of the Minister’s refusal to issue a NOC regarding its version of aspirin