In Brief: Becton Dickinson v. Quidel
This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet
Becton Dickinson v. Quidel: Firms reach settlement agreement on a patent infringement suit alleging that several Quidel products infringe on two Becton Dickinson patents for analytical chemistry tests ("The Gray Sheet" April 14, In Brief). Under the terms of the agreement Quidel will pay a cash license fee and royalties on net sales of the products beginning April 1, 1997. Quidel also will license its Q-Label technology to BD in exchange for royalties on future sales. Noting that it "has opportunities to mitigate the impact" of the additional expense through sales growth and improved margins, Quidel estimates that the annual cost of the settlement to the firm will be approximately $1.9 mil. Quidel continues to maintain that its products to not infringe the BD patents...
You may also be interested in...
While endocrine-disrupting evidence was inconclusive, the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety recommends more conservative limits on use of homosalate, octocrylene and benzophenone-3 in cosmetic products compared with current requirements under the European Cosmetics Product Regulation.
The risk of inadvertently growing SARS-CoV-2 virus in cell and gene therapies and possibly infecting patients and workers should be assessed and mitigated, the agency advises.
Move was meant to preempt others’ efforts to secure the next six months of Regeneron’s COVID-19 antibody therapeutic.