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 1,487

GSK and Novartis are in hot water for mislabelling Voltaren Osteo Gel to charge price premium
  • Cordato Partners
  • Australia
  • December 14 2017

Fresh from its success in the Nurofen Specific Pain products proceedings, the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) is looking for a


Novartis’ former IP chief urges innovative pharma to emulate high-tech patent strategies
  • IAM
  • USA
  • December 8 2017

The former global head of pharma intellectual property at Novartis has told IAM that life sciences companies should consider a more tech-like approach


PTAB Not Always Bound By Previous Court Decisions Regarding Patent Validity
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • December 4 2017

In Novartis AG v. Noven Pharm. Inc., Appeal 2016-1678-1679 (April 2017), Novartis appealed two PTAB decisions holding claims of two patents obvious


SIPO Published the Fifth Case for Public Trail
  • AFD China Intellectual Property Law Office
  • China
  • September 26 2017

On September 15, the Patent Reexamination Board (PRB) under the Staten Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) held an oral hearing for the patent


Canada’s Federal Court Confirms it has Exclusive Jurisdiction to Amend an Issued Patent
  • PCK Perry + Currier Inc Currier + Kao LLP
  • Canada
  • September 5 2017

In this Federal Court (“FC”) decision, the FC heard and granted an uncontested 4 application by Novartis AG (“Novartis”) pursuant to sections 31(3


Another Painful Loss for Warner-Lambert in Singapore
  • Bird & Bird
  • Singapore
  • August 11 2017

In the recent decision of Warner-Lambert Company LLC v Novartis (Singapore) Pte Ltd 2017 SGCA 45, the Singapore Court of Appeal upheld the High


Chemical Compound Invention, Even if the Inherent Result of a Well-Known Process, is not Obvious if there is no Teaching or Suggestion to Make the Compound in the Prior Art
  • Andrews Kurth Kenyon LLP
  • USA
  • July 17 2017

An invention, albeit the inherent result of a well-known process, is not itself obvious if the prior art references contain no teaching or suggestion


ANDA & Biosimilar and the Law
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 10 2017

Welcome to Foley & Lardner’s Summer 2017 edition of ANDA & Biosimilar and the Law. In our Legal Developments section, we report on a number of


Biosimilar Notice May Be Given Prior to FDA Approval
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • June 26 2017

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States explained that under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009


Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.
  • Merchant & Gould
  • USA
  • June 16 2017

In a unanimous decision in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that injunctive relief was not available under federal law to