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 6,871

CRISPR Update - July 2016
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 29 2016

This is the first update on CRISPR, following on from our June 24 web conference entitled, "Navigating the CRISPR Patent Landscape and Business


Judge Dismisses Amgen’s BPCIA Declaratory Judgment Action Against Sandoz
  • Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
  • USA
  • July 28 2016

Judge Chesler of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey has dismissed one of Amgen’s pending lawsuits against Sandoz under the U.S


The Promise And Pitfalls Of 3D Printing
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 27 2016

3D printing offers great promise for innovation and manufacturing, but this tool has expanded the scope of patented products that can be easily and


Federal Circuit Explains Burden Shifting in IPRs
  • Fish & Richardson PC
  • USA
  • July 27 2016

The highly truncated nature of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings has led to concerns about parties changing their positions unfairly and about


Dismissal of Motion to Vary Trial Decision in S. 8 case due to Later Infringement Finding Upheld on Appeal
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • July 27 2016

AstraZeneca has appealed a decision on its motion seeking to vary a judgment in a decision on the merits of a section 8 case. Damages were awarded to


Appeal of NOC Proceeding Dismissed as Moot, Despite Ongoing Section 8 Proceeding
  • Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
  • Canada
  • July 27 2016

Amgen was unsuccessful in a proceeding brought pursuant to the NOC Regulations. It appealed that decision. Apotex brought the within motion to


Overlap of European Patent and Antitrust Law in the Pharmaceutical Industry
  • Bugnion SpA
  • European Union
  • July 27 2016

Competition law focused on IP and pharmaceuticals


Indirect Patent Infringement Can Be Based on Willful Blindness and Circumstantial Evidence
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 26 2016

In a case remanded by the Supreme Court of the United States "for further consideration in light of Commil" (IP Update, Vol. 18, No. 6), the US Court


Physical Combinability of References Not Necessarily Required for Obviousness
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 26 2016

Addressing issues of obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the obviousness determination of the Patent Trial and Appeal


Courts Answer Key Questions Over the Reach of the BPCIA
  • Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice LLP
  • USA
  • July 26 2016

Since the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) was signed into law in 2010, only a small handful of abbreviated Biologics