Popular Articles

generic cialis
Civil Aviation Min sets up panel to probe chopper crash
The Civil Aviation Ministry tonight set up a four-member committee to probe the cause of Andhra Chief Minister Y S Rajasekhara Reddy"s helicopter crash in which he was killed.

Wipro targets govt contracts abroad
Wipro, India’s third largest IT services company, is planning to replicate its success in the government space in India. It is now courting the state sector across the world.

News of the day

Tata Power Q1 PAT up 98% at Rs 377 cr
Decrease in fuel prices in the Mumbai licence area pulled down Tata Power"s revenues in Q1 FY10 to Rs 2,015.62 crore as against Rs 2,026.13 crore.
Small Business

SC to hear Novartis case next week

The Supreme Court will hear Swiss drug maker Novartis AG"s plea against denial of patent for its blood cancer drug, Glivec, next week. - SC to decide Bajaj Auto-TVS row over Flame on Sep 15 - SC to start final hearing on gas row on Oct 20 - Novartis moves SC against Glivec order - SC refuses relief to Roche on patent plea against Cipla - SC to commence final hearing on Ambani gas row on Oct 20 - Govt for filling up vacancies of judges in SC, HC A Bench headed by Justice Markandaya Katju, before which the matter was listed for hearing today, recused itself from hearing the case. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) had in July rejected the company"s appeal against a Chennai patent office"s decision citing Sections 3(d) and 3(b) of Indian patent law. Section 3(d) of patent law restricts patents for already known drugs unless the new claims are superior in terms of efficacy and Section 3(b) restricts patents for products that are against public interest and do not demonstrate enhanced efficacy over existing products. Novartis had obtained an exclusive marketing right (generic versions of Glivec were stopped from being made) in 2003 for the drug based on its patent application. Its patent plea was rejected in 2006 by the Chennai Patent Office on several grounds, including Section 3(d). While the Swiss firm had challenged the patent office"s verdict in the Madras High Court, its appeals were transferred to IPAB, which held in July that Glivec did not meet the requirement of increased therapeutic efficacy.


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):