<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can You Get an Injunction Against A Possible Contributory Infringer?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/09/06/can-you-get-an-injunction-against-a-possible-contributory-infringer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/09/06/can-you-get-an-injunction-against-a-possible-contributory-infringer/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=can-you-get-an-injunction-against-a-possible-contributory-infringer</link>
	<description>Freshly Brewed Bio/Pharma Chat. Served Up Daily.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:57:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sandeep K. Rathod</title>
		<link>http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/09/06/can-you-get-an-injunction-against-a-possible-contributory-infringer/comment-page-1/#comment-22341</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandeep K. Rathod</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.patentbaristas.com/archives/2007/09/06/can-you-get-an-injunction-against-a-possible-contributory-infringer/#comment-22341</guid>
		<description>Let me put the other side here.
Suppose, Cipla was NOT enjoined, but the patent was held valid and so IVAX/ Teva were not gaining market entry.
In this case too, CIPLA would be under indirect injunction since there would no [immediate] buyer for its active material - Carvedilol.

So, even if CIpla would not have been enjoined, an injunction on the formulation company indricetly binds the business of the API company as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me put the other side here.<br />
Suppose, Cipla was NOT enjoined, but the patent was held valid and so IVAX/ Teva were not gaining market entry.<br />
In this case too, CIPLA would be under indirect injunction since there would no [immediate] buyer for its active material &#8211; Carvedilol.</p>
<p>So, even if CIpla would not have been enjoined, an injunction on the formulation company indricetly binds the business of the API company as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Served from: www.patentbaristas.com @ 2012-02-13 01:23:16 -->
