- Asia
- Automobile
- Bangladesh
- Banking
- Biological Inventions
- bLAWgathon
- Brand Valuation
- Business
- Company Act
- Company Law
- Competition Law
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Law
- Copyright
- Copyright Infringement
- Copyright Litigation
- Corporate Law
- Counterfeiting
- Covid
- Design
- Digital Media
- Digital Right Management
- Educational Conferences/ Seminar
- Fashion Law
- FERs
- Foreign Law
- Gaming Industry
- GDPR
- GIg Economy
- Hi Tech Patent Commercialisation
- Hi Tech Patent Litigation
- IBC
- India
- Indonesia
- Intellectual Property
- Intellectual Property Protection
- IP Commercialization
- IP Licensing
- IP Litigation
- IP Practice in India
- IPAB
- IPAB Decisions
- Khadi Industries
- labour Law
- Legal Issues
- Licensing
- Live-in relationships
- Lok Sabha Bill
- Media & Entertainment Law
- Member of Parliament
- Myanmar
- NCLT
- NEPAL
- News & Updates
- Online Gaming
- Patent Act
- Patent Commercialisation
- Patent Fess
- Patent Filing
- patent infringement
- Patent Licensing
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Marketing
- Patent Opposition
- Patent Rule Amendment
- Patents
- pharma
- Pharma- biotech- Patent Commercialisation
- Pharma/Biotech Patent Litigations
- Pollution
- Protection of SMEs
- Section 3(D)
- Signapore
- Social Media
- Sports Law
- Stamp Duty
- Stock Exchange
- TAX
- Technology
- Telecom Law
- Telecommunications
- Thailand
- Trademark
- Trademark Infringement
- Trademark Litigation
- UAE
- Uncategorized
- USPTO
- Vietnam
Merk’s patent valid but Teva’s Nasonex generic non-infringing
In Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. (hereinafter referred to be as “Merck”) v. Teva Pharms. United States, Inc. (hereinafter referred to be as “Teva”) decided on November 16, 2016, Teva’s application of Abbreviated New Drug Application (hereinafter referred to as “ANDA”) no. 205149 had triggered Merck to file infringement suit against Teva in respect of … Continue reading Merk’s patent valid but Teva’s Nasonex generic non-infringing
Read more »