Will law schools have to pay licensing fees to patent holders when they teach students
strategies under patents?
Not exact matches
These risks and uncertainties include, among others: the unfavorable outcome of litigation, including so - called «Paragraph IV» litigation and other
patent litigation, related to any of our products or products using our proprietary technologies, which may lead to competition from generic drug manufacturers; data from clinical trials may be interpreted by the FDA in different ways than we interpret it; the FDA may not agree with our regulatory approval
strategies or components of our filings for our products, including our clinical trial designs, conduct and methodologies and, for ALKS 5461, evidence of efficacy and adequacy of bridging to buprenorphine; clinical development activities may not be completed on time or at all; the results of our clinical development activities may not be positive, or predictive of real - world results or of results in subsequent clinical trials; regulatory submissions may not occur or be submitted in a timely manner; the company and its licensees may not be able to continue to successfully commercialize their products; there may be a reduction in payment rate or reimbursement for the company's products or an increase in the company's financial obligations to governmental payers; the FDA or regulatory authorities outside the U.S. may make adverse decisions regarding the company's products; the company's products may prove difficult to manufacture, be precluded from commercialization by the proprietary rights of third parties, or have unintended side effects, adverse reactions or incidents of misuse; and those risks and uncertainties described
under the heading «Risk Factors» in the company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10 - K and in subsequent filings made by the company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission («SEC»), which are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov.
First, it suggested that enhanced cooperation was impermissible in that it constituted a misuse of powers — in effect imposing an opt - out on the non-participating countries — and that an alternative
strategy — adopting a special agreement
under the European
Patent Convention — was open to the Member States.
Tax
patents, the lawyers wrote, amount to «government - issued barbed wire» to keep some taxpayers from getting equal treatment
under the tax code... After all, as Mr. Devinsky and his colleagues wrote, «The successful
patenting of tax
strategies now limits Congress» ability to shape economic policy through legislation, and places that power in the hands of individual
patent holders.»
General Plastic Industrial Co. v. Canon Kabushiki Kaisha, Case IPR2016 - 01357 (PTAB Sept. 6, 2017) A familiar
strategy in inter partes («IPR») review proceedings
under the America Invents Act («AIA») is for petitioners to file multiple petitions challenging claims in an issued
patent, including «follow - on» petitions filed after the initial petition for...
Introduced
under the America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review is a post-grant
patent proceeding formulated with the intent to establish a more efficient system to improve
patent quality and limit unnecessary counterproductive litigation and has become a powerful tool in
patent litigation
strategy.
But the the
strategy has come
under questioning of late, including by the journal Nature which noted that a surfeit of intellectual property pushes schools into «unseemly partnerships» with so - called
patent trolls.