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 182

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


Patent misuse in the pharmaceutical industry: developments in US & EU
  • Gowling WLG
  • European Union, USA
  • October 31 2007

The pharmaceutical industry has been scrutinised closely by competition authorities and courts in the US and Europe


Portions of Apotex’s requested relief for being kept off the Viagra market struck
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • August 25 2016

In an Aug. 8, 2016 Ontario Superior Court of Justice decision Lederman J. ruled on a motion brought by the defendant Pfizer seeking to strike claims


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”


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"


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


Apotex v. Sanofi; interlocutory motion re: affidavits of documents; clopidogrel
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • February 12 2010

Both parties brought motions for further and better affidavits of documents


Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Apotex
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • April 7 2009

The Court refused to grant prohibition on the basis that Apotex's allegation in respect of invalidity for obviousness was justified


PMPRB issues discussion paper on options to address the Federal Court decision in LEO Pharma
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • February 6 2008

The Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) has issued a discussion paper outlining a series of options to address the implications of the Federal Court of Canada decision in the LEO Pharma case


Ferring v Novopharm; Sanofi v Apotex; and Sanofi v Novopharm: appeals of judicial review proceedings
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • September 13 2007

The Court of Appeal heard four appeals together