lifesciences 
Corporate Governance
APRIL 29, 2021
Edwards Lifescience 2021 annual meeting is May 4, 10 AM Pacific Time. The post Edwards Lifescience 2021 Proxy Votes appeared first on Corporate Governance. To attend, vote, and submit questions during the Annual Meeting visit www.proxydocs.com/EW. They do not make it easy. I had to find the control number […].
JURIST
NOVEMBER 3, 2021
The order has been passed against Natco Pharma, Torrent Pharmaceuticals, Eris Lifesciences and Windlas Biotech. The court said that the generic companies’ manufacturing or selling of these tablets may amount to infringement of a patent owned by major pharmaceutical company Novartis AG.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
LettersBlogatory
MAY 4, 2021
The case of the day is Genus Lifesciences Inc. Tapaysa Eng’g Works Pvt. Genus brought a commercial claim against Tapaysa, an Indian company. It sought to serve process via the Indian central authority but was unsuccessful.
LettersBlogatory
MAY 4, 2021
The case of the day is Genus Lifesciences Inc. The post Case of the Day: Genus Lifesciences v. Tapaysa Eng’g Works Pvt. Genus brought a commercial claim against Tapaysa, an Indian company. It sought to serve process via the Indian central authority but was unsuccessful. The answer: none.
Law 360
JANUARY 2, 2025
The executives and directors of medical device maker Edwards Lifesciences have been hit with a shareholder derivative suit in California federal court alleging the company understated how industry trends and macroeconomic factors would impact the success of its mainstay device.
Law 360
AUGUST 6, 2024
The Federal Circuit rightfully held Meril Life Sciences was protected by a patent safe harbor when bringing its preapproval transcatheter heart valve system to an industry conference and that Edwards Lifesciences' attempts to prove otherwise are just delay tactics, Meril told the full court.
Law 360
MAY 28, 2024
Edwards Lifesciences has petitioned the full Federal Circuit to narrow its interpretation of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration safe harbor that essentially allows patent infringement during drug development, arguing that if Congress wanted the statute to be interpreted broadly, "it would have said exactly that."
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content