Patent Term Extensions and Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) Latest developments in Japan
|
|
|
- Ira Hutchinson
- 9 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 AIPPI Congress Toronto (2014) Workshop Pharma 3 (Patent Term Extension) Patent Term Extensions and Supplementary Protection Certificates (SPCs) Latest developments in Japan Tsuyoshi Sueyoshi, Ph.D., attorney-at-law YUASA and HARA 1
2 Contents Judgment of IP High Court Grand Panel (substantially en banc) on May 30, 2014 in the Genentech v JPO case - IP H. Ct. denied the JPO s guideline. - IP H. Ct. shows its own constructions. (Yuasa and Hara* represented Genentech in this case. (*Kozo Yabe, Tsuyoshi Sueyoshi, Takumi Terachi and Akiko Nakahama) Provisions of the Japanese Patent Act. Development in construction - History and changes in practice 2
3 Background A patent can be extended in multiple times. Patent Scope (Compound A For anticancer) registration Approval (colon) Approval (lung) Expiration Separately extended in each scope. Extension Requirements of multiple extension has not been clear. (Wording of the Patent Act is unclear.) An approval causes extensions in multiple patents. An approval (Active Ingredient: Compound A Indication: Hiperlipemia) Extension in patent of Compound A Extension In patent of use invention (HL) 3
4 Disputes in construction of provisions of the Patent Act Q1 How should we define the scope of rejection derived from prior approval? Approval: Specific product (point) Patent Scope Approval I Approval II Scope of Rejection Certain range Scope of Rejection registration Expiration Extension Allowance or rejection of extension by Approval II depends on scope of rejection of Approval I. Q2 How should we define the scope of extended patent? Should scope of rejection be the same as scope of extended patent? Patent Scope Approval Scope of Rejection Extended Scope of patent 4
5 IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, 2014 Facts(1) Two approvals are rendered for different dosages of Avastin (bevacizumab) in colon cancer. (Active ingredient and indication are in common.) Both of the products of the 1 st approval and 2 nd approval fall under the scope of patent. 5
6 IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, 2014 Facts(2) FOLFOX + Avastin; 2 weeks/cycle (1 st approval) Avastin:5mg/kg i LV, L-OHP (Day 1) 5-FU (IV; 46hrs) (Day 1&2) No dosage (Day 3 to 14) XELOX + Avastin; 3 weeks/cycle (2 nd approval) Avastin:7.5 mg/kg i LV, L-OHP (Day 1) Capecitabine (oral administration) (Day 1 to 15) No dosage (Day 16 to 21) 6
7 IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, 2014 Answers in Q1 and Q2 A1 Scope of rejection derived from the 1st approval (Allowance of patent term extension on the basis of the 2 nd approval) Patentee can obtain patent term extension if at least one of ingredients (active or non-active), an amount (of an ingredient), dosage-administration and indications is different from those of the 1 st approval. A2 Scope of extended patent Defined by ingredients (active and non-active), dosageadministration and indications + equivalents and substantially identical products. 7
8 IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, 2014 Tentative practice under the judgment Patentee can obtain multiple patent term extensions in a stepwise manner for a patent (ex. each dosage-administration). Scope of extended patent for each extension is segmented. Future court cases are necessary for clarifying the scope of equivalents and substantially identical in infringement of extended patent (Does equivalents mean bioequivalence of generics?). It is desirable to file patent term extension application for each pharmaceutical approval. We are waiting the judgment of the Supreme (the JPO filed a request of acceptance of final appeal; the judgment has not become final or binding.). 8
9 Problems in construction of provisions Relationship between three factors Approval Pharmaceutical Affairs Act Article 14-1, 2, 9 Reason for Rejection (for subsequent approval) Article 67-3, paragraph 1 Scope of Extended Patent Article 68-2 No Explicit Relationship among (i) product of prior approval, (ii) reason for rejection and (iii) scope of extended patent. Wording is not clear. 9
10 Provisions of the Patent Act (1) Overview The provisions were introduced in (substantially) No amendment after Article 67, paragraph 2 [Basic provision; Period, Disposition by Authority] Extended Period: 5 years at maximum. When a patentee or licensee has a period in which he/she cannot perform patented invention because he/she needs to obtain approval or any other disposition designated by Cabinet Order ( Disposition Designated by Cabinet Order ) (ex. pharmaceutical approval), the patent term can be extend for such period. 10
11 Provisions of the Patent Act (2) Reason for Rejection (1) Article 67-3, paragraph 1, (i) to (v) (i) where the Disposition Designated by Cabinet Order (ex. pharmaceutical approval) is not found to have been necessary to obtain for the working of the patented invention; The wording of not necessary has no clear definition. Relationship between Disposition Designated by Cabinet Order and patented invention is not clear. The term active ingredient or indication is NOT used. 11
12 Pharmaceutical approval Name Ingredients (active or non-active) Amount Dosage and administration Indications Side effects and other quality matters Efficacy Safety stipulated under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act (Article 14(2)(iii), 14(1) and (9)) Provisions of the Patent Act (3) Reason for Rejection (2) Patented Invention Constituent Features specified by each Different patentee Concept! 12
13 Provisions of the Patent Act (4) Scope of Extended Patent Article 68-2 Scope of extended patent is defined by the product used for the usage of the Disposition Designated by Cabinet Order Product and Usage has no clear definition. Product: Usage: Approved product? Active ingredient? Indication? Dosage-Administration? 13
14 History and development of practice 1987 Introduction of PTE system JPO s 1 st guideline,which was affirmed by high court in a long period Reason for Rejection = Scope of Extended Patent Product = Active Ingredient, Usage = Indications Judgment of IP H. Ct., May 29, 2009 Judgment of S. Ct., Apri.28, st guideline was denied. JPO s 2 nd guideline 2014 Here! Judgment of IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, nd guideline was denied. JPO filed petition of writ of certiorari with S. Ct. 14
15 1 ST guideline of JPO(1) Overview Practice was governed by the 1 st guideline for a long period. A2: Scope of rejection = Scope of extended patent. Patent Scope Approval Scope of Rejection & Scope of extended patent A1 Scope of rejection(=scope of extended patent) is defined by (i) active ingredient and (ii) indications. Product in Article 68-2 Use in Article 68-2 = active ingredient = indications 15
16 1 ST guideline of JPO(2) Problem When the product of prior approval is outside the scope of the patented invention: Patent Scope (DDS; Applicable to various active ingredients) Approval I (non-dds) Rejected! Approval II (DDS) Scope of Rejection by Approval I (Defined by Active Ingredient & Indication) (* Approval 1 & 2 have active ingredient and indication in common.) No patent term extension is available for DDS technology, even if DDS improves QOL. 16
17 IP H. Ct., May 29, 2009 & its final appeal (S. Ct., April 28, 2011) When the product of prior approval does NOT fall within the scope of any claim of the patent, patent term extension of subsequent approval should NOT be rejected on the basis of the prior approval. (Judgment of S. Ct., April 28, 2011) S. Ct. denied the 1 st guideline at least under the situation above. JPO released the 2 nd guideline on December 28,
18 2 nd guideline of JPO(1) Basic Concept Picking-Up of examination-approval items under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act through features of patented claim (claim works as filter). (* Exception: Indications should be always picked up regardless of features of claim) Examination-Approval Ingredients Amount Dosage and administration Indications Side effects and other quality matters Efficacy Safety Claim (as filter) Compound A (novel compound) (No feature) (No feature) Blocked! No pick-up Exception Blocked! No pick-up Scope of rejection & extended patent Compound A Approved indications 18
19 2 nd guideline of JPO(2) Problem(1) Features of claim are at the discretion of patentee. Picking up process can depend on claim-drafting. Examination-Approval Ingredients Amount Dosage and administration Indications Side effects and other quality matters Efficacy Safety Claim (as filter) Compound A (novel compound) 1pg to 10g/kg day (No feature) Blocked! No pick-up Scope of rejection & extended patent Compound A Approved dosage Approved indications Narrowly segmented 19
20 2 nd guideline of JPO(3) Problem(2) Scope of rejection & extended patent can depend on claim-drafting. Patent Scope Approval I Approval II Patent Scope Approval I Approval II Wide scope defined by Active ingredient, Indications Narrow scope defined by Active ingredient, Indications, Dosage IP H. Ct. dismissed the 2 nd guideline of JPO. 20
21 IP H. Ct. (Grand Panel), May 30, 2014 Answers in Q1 and Q2 A1 Scope of rejection derived from the 1st approval (Allowance of patent term extension on the basis of the 2 nd approval) Patentee can obtain patent term extension if at least one of ingredients (active or non-active), an amount (of an ingredient), dosage-administration and indications is different from those of the 1 st approval. A2 Scope of extended patent Defined by ingredients (active and non-active), dosageadministration and indications + equivalents and substantially identical products. 21
22 Thank you! Tsuyoshi Sueyoshi, Ph.D., attorney-at-law Section 206, New-Ohtemachi Building, 2-1, Ohtemachi 2-chome, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo , Japan Main Telephone: Main Facsimile:
Japanese Opposition System
Japanese Opposition System 1. Historical Background of the Opposition System in Japan From 1921 to 1997, Japan, following the examples of major industrialized countries, established a pre-registration
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS REGARDING JAPANESE PATENT PRACTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS REGARDING JAPANESE PATENT PRACTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS compiled by the International Activities Center of the Japan Patent Attorneys Association I. APPLICATION
Present Situation of IP Disputes in Japan
Present Situation of IP Disputes in Japan Feb 19, 2014 Chief Judge Toshiaki Iimura 1 1 IP High Court established -Apr.1.2005- l Appeal cases related to patent rights etc. from district courts nationwide
Second medical use patents
Second medical use patents The European Swiss perspective AIPPI Helsinki 2013, Pharma Workshop II Andri Hess Part 1 Second medical use claims the protection they confer 2 Second (or further) medical use
Drug Re-Examination/Data Exclusivity in JAPAN and Neighboring Countries
Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Association Drug Re-Examination/Data Exclusivity in JAPAN and Neighboring Countries AIPPI Forum & ExCo Workshop Pharma IV September 6, 2013 at Helsinki Yoichi OKUMURA
International Patent Litigation and Jurisdiction. Study of Hypothetical Question 1 Under the Hague Draft Convention and Japanese Laws
International Patent Litigation and Jurisdiction Study of Hypothetical Question 1 Under the Hague Draft Convention and Japanese Laws Yoshio Kumakura Attorney at Law Nakamura & Partners 1 The 1999 Draft
Norway Advokatfirmaet Grette
This text first appeared in the IAM magazine supplement Patents in Europe 2008 April 2008 Norway By Amund Brede Svendsen and Svein Ruud Johansen, Advokatfirmaet Grette, Oslo 1. What options are open to
Trends in Global Patent Litigation
Trends in Global Patent Litigation Increasing Number of Patent Suits in the U.S. and China China leads Asia and (soon) the rest of the world Global Trend Toward Specialized Patent Courts Recent developments
NJIPLA s 25th Annual Pharmaceutical / Chemical Patent Practice Update First Applicant Generic Exclusivity and Forfeiture Thereof.
NJIPLA s 25th Annual Pharmaceutical / Chemical Patent Practice Update First Applicant Generic Exclusivity and Forfeiture Thereof December 7, 2011 Andrew S. Wasson Frommer Lawrence & HaugLLP Editor, FDALawyersBlog
The Appellate Mandate: What It Is and Why It Matters By Jennifer L. Swize
ARTICLES The Appellate Mandate: What It Is and Why It Matters By Jennifer L. Swize Just the other day, a trial team handling post-appeal matters on remand wanted to know the significance of the mandate
Labor Contract Act. (Act No. 128 of December 5, 2007) PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION. The Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training
Labor Contract Act (Act No. 128 of December 5, 2007) The Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training PROVISIONAL TRANSLATION Copyright The Japan Institute for Labour Policy and Training 2008 All rights
Appeal Bonds, Sureties, and Stays
Appeal Bonds, Sureties, and Stays Appellate Lawyers Association April 22, 2009 Brad Elward Peoria Office The Effect of a Judgment A judgment is immediately subject to enforcement and collection. Illinois
More Uncertainty: What s The Difference Between a Claim and a Theory?
The AIPLA Antitrust News A Publication of the AIPLA Committee on Antitrust Law October 2010 More Uncertainty: What s The Difference By Steven R. Trybus and Sara Tonnies Horton 1 The United States Court
Supreme Court Decision on Delaware Limited Partnerships
Supreme Court Decision on Delaware Limited Partnerships Issue 113, August 2015 In brief On July 17, 2015, the Japan Supreme Court overturned a lower court (Nagoya High Court) decision and determined that
Experiences with the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) at the USPTO
Experiences with the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) at the USPTO Tel Aviv, Israel Paolo Trevisan Patent Attorney Office of Policy and International Affairs United States Patent and Trademark Office 1
FAMILY COURT of JAPAN
GUIDE to the 2013 FAMILY COURT of JAPAN Supreme Court of Japan CONTENTS I. JAPANESE FAMILY COURT SYSTEM 4 II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF A FAMILY COURT 5 III. CHARACTERISTICS OF A FAMILY COURT 6 A. Family
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE DANIEL SUNGKOOK CHONG v. TENNESSEE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS Appeal from the Board of Law Examiners No. M2015-00982-SC-BAR-BLE Filed December 4, 2015 The petitioner
Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee
Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee The Appellate Court Procedural Rules Committee proposes to amend Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure 901, 1501, 1512, 1516, 1517, 1541 and 1561, and proposes
Design Act ( Act No. 125 of 1959)
この 意 匠 法 の 翻 訳 は 平 成 十 八 年 法 律 第 五 十 五 号 までの 改 正 ( 平 成 19 年 4 月 1 日 施 行 )について 法 令 用 語 日 英 標 準 対 訳 辞 書 ( 平 成 18 年 3 月 版 )に 準 拠 して 作 成 したものです なお この 法 令 の 翻 訳 は 公 定 訳 ではありません 法 的 効 力 を 有 するのは 日 本 語 の 法 令
FEE SHIFTING IN PATENT LITIGATION
FEE SHIFTING IN PATENT LITIGATION Sughrue Mion, PLLC Abraham J. Rosner May 2014 I. BACKGROUND In the U.S., each party to litigation ordinarily pays its own attorney fees regardless of the outcome (called
2016 EUROSEAD. www.ficpi.org FICPI PATENT DRAFTING TRAINING COURSE PLATINUM SPONSOR COURSE DATES APPLICATION DEADLINE
2016 EUROSEAD FICPI PATENT DRAFTING TRAINING COURSE PLATINUM SPONSOR FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DES CONSEILS EN PROPRIÉTÉ INTELLECTUELLE INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ATTORNEYS INTERNATIONALE
Tsubame Patent Attorney Firm at a Glance. Tsubame Patent Attorney Firm Registered Patent Attorney Itsuki Shimbo PhD.
Tsubame Patent Attorney Firm at a Glance Tsubame Patent Attorney Firm Registered Patent Attorney Itsuki Shimbo PhD. 1 Profile Tsubame Patent Attorney firm was founded in 2004 with the aim of providing
In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies: Federal Circuit Decides Appeal Jurisdiction and Standard of Review Issues for AIA Reviews
CLIENT MEMORANDUM In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies: Federal Circuit Decides Appeal Jurisdiction and Standard of Review February 5, 2015 AUTHORS Michael W. Johnson Tara L. Thieme THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT HOLDS
Patent Litigation. Inventions of mission and additional remuneration due to the inventor for such inventions
PATENTS Patent Litigation The most interesting Court decisions concerning patent litigations published in 2004 and early in 2005 focus on employee s inventions, on a French style file wrapper estoppel
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 04-5155, -5156 CLINTWOOD ELKHORN MINING COMPANY, GATLIFF COAL COMPANY, and PREMIER ELKHORN COAL COMPANY, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, UNITED STATES,
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Copyright 2011 Supreme Council of Information and Communication Technology (ictqatar) Table of Contents 1. Definitions... 4 2. Purpose... 4 3. Your Representations... 5 4.
PART 3. PROCEDURAL ASPECT OF TRADEMARK LAW
PART 3. PROCEDURAL ASPECT OF TRADEMARK LAW CHAPTER 10: OVERVIEW CHAPTER 11: APPLICATION FOR TRADEMARK REGISTRATION CHAPTER 12: EXAMINATION CHAPTER 13: TRIALS CHAPTER 14: LITIGATION CHAPTER 10. OVERVIEW
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Lorrie Logsdon sued her employer, Turbines, Inc.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit October 20, 2010 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court LORRIE LOGSDON, Plaintiff Appellant, v. TURBINES,
Quality Management Manual for Patent Examination. (Quality Manual)
Quality Management Manual for Patent Examination (Quality Manual) June 2015 Japan Patent Office History of revision Date August 27, 2014 June 30, 2015 Content Publication of the first edition Publication
Memory Stick and Memory Stick PRO Player/Recorder Connector A G R E E M E N T
This "Memory Stick and Memory Stick PRO Player/Recorder Connector AGREEMENT" sample is disclosed to your company for the purpose of evaluation of the possibility of manufacturing Memory Stick related products.
CHAPTER 42A HEARINGS AND APPEALS. Act shall mean the Casino Control Act, N.J.S.A. 5:12-1 et seq.
CHAPTER 42A HEARINGS AND APPEALS SUBCHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS 19:42A-1.1 Definitions The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context
Basic Law on Intellectual Property (Law No.122 of 2002) (Provisional Translation)
Basic Law on Intellectual Property (Law No.122 of 2002) (Provisional Translation) Table of Contents Chapter I General Provisions (Articles 1 to 11) Chapter II Basic Measures (Articles 12 to 22) Chapter
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO. 1816. 1. Criminal Rule 11 is amended to add a new subsection (i), to read as follows:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA ORDER NO. 1816 IT IS ORDERED: Adding Criminal Rule 11(i) and Delinquency Rule 21(d)(3) and 23(f) concerning restorative justice programs, to implement the recommendations
IN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED December 9, 2004. Appeal No. 04-2182-FT DISTRICT IV ATLANTA CASUALTY COMPANIES, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 9, 2004 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear
Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases
Determining Jurisdiction for Patent Law Malpractice Cases This article originally appeared in The Legal Intelligencer on May 1, 2013 As an intellectual property attorney, the federal jurisdiction of patent-related
Patent Litigation in Germany An Introduction (I)
Patent Litigation in Germany An Introduction (I) By Prof. Dr. Heinz Goddar, Dr. jur. Carl-Richard Haarmann Prof. Dr. Heinz Goddar Senior Partner, Boehmert & Boehmert, Munich, and Honorary Professor for
The Parliament has passed the Act of the Czech Republic as follows: PART ONE 1 Purpose of the Act
ACT of the Czech Republic No. 106/1999 Sb. on a free access to information as amended by the Acts No. 101/2000 Sb., No. 159/2000 Sb. and No. 39/2001 Sb. The Parliament has passed the Act of the Czech Republic
WIPO TRAINING OF TRAINERS PROGRAM ON EFFECTIVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT BY SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMEs)
WIPO TRAINING OF TRAINERS PROGRAM ON EFFECTIVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSET MANAGEMENT BY SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (SMEs) IP Law and Administration in the State of Qatar by Malik Al-Kammaz Saba
A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process
A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process Office of Victims Services California Attorney General s Office A Victim s Guide to the Capital Case Process Office of Victims Services California Attorney
RULES OF THE TAX APPEAL COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I
RULES OF THE TAX APPEAL COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I (SCRU-13-0005988) Adopted and Promulgated by the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai i As amended March 6, 1981 Effective March 6, 1981 With Further
Patent Act ( Act No. 121 of 1959)
この 特 許 法 の 翻 訳 は 平 成 十 八 年 法 律 第 百 九 号 までの 改 正 ( 平 成 19 年 9 月 30 日 施 行 )について 法 令 用 語 日 英 標 準 対 訳 辞 書 ( 平 成 19 年 3 月 版 )に 準 拠 して 作 成 したも のです なお この 法 令 の 翻 訳 は 公 定 訳 ではありません 法 的 効 力 を 有 するのは 日 本 語 の 法 令
LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY BANDS OF ODAWA INDIANS
LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY BANDS OF ODAWA INDIANS TRIBAL COURT Chapter 7 Appellate Procedures Court Rule Adopted 4/7/2002 Appellate Procedures Page 1 of 12 Chapter 7 Appellate Procedures Table of Contents 7.000
Market withdrawal and suspension of marketing authorisation of medicinal product due to good manufacturing practice noncompliance in India
Market withdrawal and suspension of marketing authorisation of medicinal product due to good manufacturing practice noncompliance in India C-269/13 Acino AG vs. European Commission, LS&R 885 Citeersuggestie:
Tax Research: Understanding Sources of Tax Law (Why my IRC beats your Rev Proc!)
Tax Research: Understanding Sources of Tax Law (Why my IRC beats your Rev Proc!) Understanding the Federal Courts There are three levels of Federal courts that hear tax cases. At the bottom of the hierarchy,
IP Litigation in Europe and in Germany
& P A R T N E R P A T E N T A T T O R N E Y S D Ü S S E L D O R F M U N I C H IP Litigation in Europe and in Germany Dr. Dirk Schulz Outline - Patent litigation in Europe - German patent litigation system
Effective Patent Application Drafting and Prosecution in Light of Recent Developments Thomas F. Woods. Topics Covered Background Recent Changes in the Law Before Writing Prior Art Searches Effective Application
The Latest Intellectual Property News
The Latest Intellectual Property News From Lowe Hauptman & Ham, LLP VOL. 5, NO. 2 MARCH 2014 Hello from everyone in Lowe Hauptman & Ham, LLP, and welcome to The Latest Intellectual Property News, a newsletter
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF REGISTRATION Applicable for the top-level domain.se from May 27, 2015
TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF REGISTRATION Applicable for the top-level domain.se from May 27, 2015 (The Swedish version of these terms and conditions shall prevail) 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Stiftelsen för Internetinfrastruktur
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: THOMAS B. O FARRELL McClure & O Farrell, P.C. Westfield, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA ALFRED McCLURE, Appellant-Defendant, vs. No. 86A03-0801-CV-38
Drug Pricing System in Japan
Reference Chuikyo - 1 June 6, 2012 Drug Pricing System in Japan April 2012 (Underlined phrases in red in this text: New features and modifications to the current pricing system adopted by the 2012 system
2. SCOPE This procedure applies to all undergraduate students registered at Koç University, and related people and units responsible for the process.
Date :16.01.2015 Page : 1 / 5 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this procedure is to form a base for the Koç University Minor Program that is being offered to successful undergraduate students who desire to gain
POLICY NO. 3-80 LEGAL DEFENSE BENEFIT
FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC. POLICY NO. 3-80 LEGAL DEFENSE BENEFIT BACKGROUND: In order to provide legal defense benefits to the members of Florida P.B.A., the Board of Directors hereby
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
Filed 12/3/14 Backflip Software v. Cisco Systems CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not
PATENT LITIGATION IN MEXICO: OVERVIEW AND STRATEGY
PATENT LITIGATION IN MEXICO: OVERVIEW AND STRATEGY SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES IN PATENT LITIGATION IN MEXICO Global E-Commerce Law and Business Report. September, 2003. Patent infringement actions. The Mexican
Willful Infringement Under In re Seagate
Willful Infringement Under In re Seagate Robert A. Matthews, Jr. Latimer, Mayberry & Matthews Intellectual Property Law, llp (www.latimerip.com) The Annual IP Counsel Forum Mar. 25, 2008, San Jose, CA
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2005 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT MARIAMA MONIQUE CHANGAMIRE ) SHAW, ) ) Appellant/Cross-Appellee,
JUDICIAL BRANCH MEMORANDUM. Re: New Hampshire Superior Court Civil Rules Effective October 1, 2013
JUDICIAL BRANCH MEMORANDUM To: Attorneys; Legal Assistants; Litigants From: Patricia A. Lenz, Superior Court Administrator Julie W. Howard, Strafford Superior Court Clerk Date: Updated December 16, 2013
Public Invitation of Ideas for Developing a Global Tourism Hub in Yumeshima
This English translation is for reference only. Japanese is the official language used for this public invitation of ideas. Public Invitation of Ideas for Developing a Global Tourism Hub in Yumeshima May
CIVIL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Unofficial translation Disclaimer 1 Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks (ROSPATENT), 2011 CIVIL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Passed by the State Duma on November 24, 2006
Drug/Drug Combination: Bevacizumab in combination with chemotherapy
AHFS Final Determination of Medical Acceptance: Off-label Use of Bevacizumab in Combination with Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated with Cytotoxic Chemotherapy
Chinese Domain Names Dispute Resolution Policy. (Trial Implementation)
Chinese Domain Names Dispute Resolution Policy (Trial Implementation) (Promulgated by the China Internet Network Information Center on November 1 2000 and effective as of 30 days after promulgation.) Article
European Patent Office / State Intellectual Property Office of the People s Republic of China
European Patent Office / State Intellectual Property Office of the People s Republic of China UNITY OF INVENTION IP5 REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction 5 II. Summary of the IP5 offices contributions
Government Contract. Andrews Litigation Reporter. Intellectual Property Rights In Government Contracting. Expert Analysis
Government Contract Andrews Litigation Reporter VOLUME 23 h ISSUE 6 h July 27, 2009 Expert Analysis Commentary Intellectual Property Rights In Government Contracting By William C. Bergmann, Esq., and Bukola
(Act No. 66 of May 23, 1986) Chapter I General Provisions
Act on Special Measures concerning the Handling of Legal Services by Foreign Lawyers (The amendment act comes into effect as from March 1, 2016 (Act No. 69 of 2014 comes into effect as from April 1, 2016)
PETITION TO ARBITRATE A FEE DISPUTE (Client Attorney Petition)
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICE 1175 East Garvey Avenue, Suite 105 Covina, California 91724-3618 (626) 966-5530 (626) 442-6973 (909) 599-3847 Fax (626) 915-4755 PETITION TO ARBITRATE A FEE DISPUTE
Patent Reissue. Frequently Asked Questions
Patent Reissue Frequently Asked Questions Patent Reissue Frequently Asked Questions 1 Table of Contents 1. WHAT IS A REISSUE PATENT APPLICATION?...2 2. WHAT TYPES OF SITUATIONS CALL FOR A REISSUED PATENT?...2
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MICHIGAN S ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE SYSTEM
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MICHIGAN S ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE SYSTEM HISTORY Michigan s system for attorney discipline has existed in its current form since 1978. With the creation of the State Bar of Michigan
Global Guide to Competition Litigation Japan
Global Guide to Competition Litigation Japan 2012 Table of Contents Availability of private enforcement in respect of competition law infringement and jurisdiction... 1 Conduct of proceedings and costs...
Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 [email protected] Challenging EEOC Conciliation Charges Law360, New
Liability of Internet Service Providers
Liability of Internet Service Providers Tsuneaki Hagiwara Manager of the Legal Department, Toppan Printing Co., Ltd. 1. U.S. Rules Limiting Liability of Internet Service Providers (1) Copyright Infringement
INDONESIA Trademark Law as amended by Law No. 15 on August 1, 2001
INDONESIA Trademark Law as amended by Law No. 15 on August 1, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 CHAPTER II SCOPE OF MARKS Part One General Article 2 Article 3 Part Two Marks
United Video v. Amazon.com: Clear Disavowal of Claim Scope
United Video v. Amazon.com: Clear Disavowal of Claim Scope Today in United Video Properties, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Fed. App x (Fed. Cir. 2014)(Lourie, J.), the Court affirmed a noninfringement ruling where
HAWAI`I REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 672B DESIGN CLAIM CONCILIATION PANEL. Act 207, 2007 Session Laws of Hawai`i
HAWAI`I REVISED STATUTES CHAPTER 672B DESIGN CLAIM CONCILIATION PANEL Act 207, 2007 Session Laws of Hawai`i Section 672B-1 Definitions 672B-2 Administration of chapter 672B-3 Design claim conciliation
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2012-CT-00718-SCT ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
LESLIE B. SHUMAKE, JR. v. KATARINA SITTON SHUMAKE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2012-CT-00718-SCT ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 04/10/2012 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. WOODROW WILSON BRAND, JR.
