Web Results


May 1, 2017 ... Court's order granting appellees' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim.” United States ex rel. Wilkins v. United. Health Grp., Inc., 659 F.3d 295, 302 (3d ... The False Claims Act is meant “to reach all types of fraud . . . that might result in financial loss to the. Government.” Cook Cty. v. United States ex rel.


May 10, 2017 ... On May 1, 2017, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of United States ex rel. Petratos, et al. v. Genentech, Inc., et al.,


Celltrion, Inc. et al v. Genentech, Inc. et al. 3:18-cv-00276; Filed: 01/11/2018; Case Updated Daily; Latest Docket Entry: 02/15/2018; PACER. Thank you for your request. You will receive a custom alert email when the Litigation Campaign Assessment is available. ×. Data. Alert. Save. 4Plaintiffs; 4Defendants; 0Accused


CITY OF HOPE NATIONAL MEDICAL ) CENTER, ). Plaintiff and Respondent, S129463 v. Ct.App. 2/2 B161549 GENENTECH, INC., Los Angeles County ...... San Jose, CA. 30, Microsoft Corporation (Amicus curiae) Represented by Gregory P. Stone Munger, Tolles Et Al 560 Misison Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, CA.


Jan 11, 2018 ... Celltrion, Inc. et al v. Genentech, Inc. et al. Plaintiff: Celltrion, Inc., Celltrion Healthcare Co., Ltd.,, Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH. Defendant: Genentech, Inc., Biogen Inc., Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. and City of Hope. Case Number: 3:2018cv00276.


Parties, docket activity and news coverage of federal case Baxalta Incorporated et al v. Genentech, Inc. et al, case number 1:17-cv-00509, from Delaware Court.


Jun 9, 2016 ... OSI and Genentech co-promoted Tarceva, a drug approved to treat certain patients with non-small cell lung cancer or pancreatic cancer. Shields' ... Shields v. Genentech, Inc., et al., Civil Action CV 11-0822 MEJ (N.D. Cal.). _____. Richard L. Cassin is the publisher and editor of the FCPA Blog. He'll be the ...


Jun 26, 2013 ... Genentech, Inc., Appeal No 2012-1454) the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the 'CAFC') affirmed a first-instance decision refusing ... Thereafter, Genentech argued before the arbitral tribunal in the parallel ICC arbitration (the 'Tribunal') that the judgment of the CAFC disposed of all the ...


“Holding "that petitioner was not required, insofar as Article III is concerned, to break or terminate its 1997 license agreement before seeking a declaratory judgment in federal court that the underlying patent is invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed"”Musselman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Alabama, No. 13-14250 ( 11th Cir.