<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/">
<channel rdf:about="http://www.inderscience.com/current_issue_rss/index.php?journal=ijipm">
<title>Most recent issue published online for the International Journal of Intellectual Property Management.</title>
<description>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management</description>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=83&amp;year=2011&amp;vol=4&amp;issue=4</link>
<dc:publisher>Inderscience Publishers Ltd</dc:publisher>
<dc:language>en-uk</dc:language>
<prism:publicationName>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1478-9647</prism:issn>
<prism:eIssn>1478-9655</prism:eIssn>
<prism:copyright>&#169; 2011 Inderscience Publishers Ltd</prism:copyright>
<prism:rightsAgent>editor@inderscience.com</prism:rightsAgent>
<image rdf:resource="https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijipm_scoverijipm.jpg" />
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043871" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043872" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043874" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043879" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043880" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043875" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>
<image rdf:about="https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijipm_scoverijipm.jpg">
<title>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management</title>
<url>https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijipm_scoverijipm.jpg</url>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=83&amp;year=2011&amp;vol=4&amp;issue=4</link>
</image>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043871">
<title>Unveiling the technology&#58; a case study for cellular mobile phones</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43871</link>
<description>Patents are the best resource for tracking of the latest advancements in technology. They are tracked regularly especially by the competitive companies, R&amp;D labs and individuals. Based on various parameters of concern including technology trends, references and the usage of the technologies, the relevant patents are retrieved to unveil the technology of a product &#40;Ridley, 2002&#41;. In the present work, as a test case parsing the technical specifications of the given mobile device, a comprehensive search technique of the patent databases has been established by applying ranking methods based on &#39;Referenced By&#39; for each patent. These are then re&#45;ordered for identifying the most likely patents along with their URL links involved in the current technology. This has been exemplified using a typical case of a mobile device, i.e., &#39;cell phone&#39;. The results obtained cover all the software and hardware technologies involved in making of a new device as distinct from its older versions to track the latest technological advancements implemented in a product of one&#39;s interest.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43871"><b>Unveiling the technology&#58; a case study for cellular mobile phones</b></A><br />Ranjeet Kumar; R.C. Tripathi; M.D. Tiwari<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 211 - 219</i><br />Patents are the best resource for tracking of the latest advancements in technology. They are tracked regularly especially by the competitive companies, R&amp;D labs and individuals. Based on various parameters of concern including technology trends, references and the usage of the technologies, the relevant patents are retrieved to unveil the technology of a product &#40;Ridley, 2002&#41;. In the present work, as a test case parsing the technical specifications of the given mobile device, a comprehensive search technique of the patent databases has been established by applying ranking methods based on &#39;Referenced By&#39; for each patent. These are then re&#45;ordered for identifying the most likely patents along with their URL links involved in the current technology. This has been exemplified using a typical case of a mobile device, i.e., &#39;cell phone&#39;. The results obtained cover all the software and hardware technologies involved in making of a new device as distinct from its older versions to track the latest technological advancements implemented in a product of one&#39;s interest.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043871</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 211 - 219</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Ranjeet Kumar; R.C. Tripathi; M.D. Tiwari</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad, Deoghat Jhalwa, Uttar Pradesh&#45;211012, India. &#39; Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad, Deoghat Jhalwa, Uttar Pradesh&#45;211012, India. &#39; Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad, Deoghat Jhalwa, Uttar Pradesh&#45;211012, India</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>device specifications</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patents</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>information retrieval</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>cellular mobiles</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>technology mapping</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intellectual property rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>IPR</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>mobile phones</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>cell phones</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>product technology</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>mobile devices</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patent databases</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>ranking methods.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>211</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>219</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043872">
<title>How agricultural biotechnology scientists perceive intellectual property rights &#40;IPRs&#41; and their implications&#58; insights from developing Asia</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43872</link>
<description>This paper presents the results of a web&#45;survey of scientists and researchers from India, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam, conducted to measure their awareness, attitudes and perspectives towards the new intellectual property rights &#40;IPRs&#41; paradigm in agriculture. Results indicate that respondents are aware on IPR and its features and have openness in answering IPR&#45;related questions despite the current ambiguity and debate surrounding IPRs in public sector research. They also understand global policy trends and some of the risk factors involved. However, they need to have more exposure to, and training on, the use of the different IPR instruments. Interestingly, respondents disclosed that even with expanding IPR in agriculture, they did not have problems accessing new biological materials and genetic resources from local and international research centres. Results can serve as important reference for institutions implementing IP capability programmes for better appreciation of the importance of IPR for public research institutions.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43872"><b>How agricultural biotechnology scientists perceive intellectual property rights &#40;IPRs&#41; and their implications&#58; insights from developing Asia</b></A><br />Jane Payumo; Howard Grimes; Keith Jones<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 220 - 238</i><br />This paper presents the results of a web&#45;survey of scientists and researchers from India, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam, conducted to measure their awareness, attitudes and perspectives towards the new intellectual property rights &#40;IPRs&#41; paradigm in agriculture. Results indicate that respondents are aware on IPR and its features and have openness in answering IPR&#45;related questions despite the current ambiguity and debate surrounding IPRs in public sector research. They also understand global policy trends and some of the risk factors involved. However, they need to have more exposure to, and training on, the use of the different IPR instruments. Interestingly, respondents disclosed that even with expanding IPR in agriculture, they did not have problems accessing new biological materials and genetic resources from local and international research centres. Results can serve as important reference for institutions implementing IP capability programmes for better appreciation of the importance of IPR for public research institutions.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043872</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 220 - 238</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Jane Payumo; Howard Grimes; Keith Jones</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Washington State University, 1610 NE Eastgate Blvd., Suite 650, Pullman, WA, USA. &#39; Washington State University, French Ad 324, Pullman, WA, USA. &#39; Washington State University, 1610 NE Eastgate Blvd., Suite 650, Pullman, WA, USA</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>agricultural biotechnology</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>biotech scientists</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intellectual property rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>IPR</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>survey</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>public sector research</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>India</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Malaysia</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Philippines</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Thailand</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Vietnam</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>agriculture.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>220</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>238</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043874">
<title>Optimal negotiated transfer pricing and its implications for international transfer pricing of intangibles</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43874</link>
<description>Intangibles exhibit zero marginal licensing cost, including cross&#45;border intra&#45;firm licensing of intangibles within a multinational corporation &#40;MNC&#41;. An MNC may not realise the full profit potential of licensing intangibles intra&#45;firm, however, under suboptimal negotiated transfer pricing schemes. Our negotiated transfer pricing bargaining structure unlocks this potential by producing an optimal transfer price and larger optimal intra&#45;firm licensed quantity. Increased licensing of intangibles intra&#45;firm across borders produces a greater potential tax savings&#47;consolidated after&#45;tax profit gain per unit of transfer price adjustment, creating a context where MNCs feel a greater imperative or incentive to move beyond legal tax avoidance toward evasion.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43874"><b>Optimal negotiated transfer pricing and its implications for international transfer pricing of intangibles</b></A><br />Peter C. Dawson; Stephen M. Miller<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 239 - 269</i><br />Intangibles exhibit zero marginal licensing cost, including cross&#45;border intra&#45;firm licensing of intangibles within a multinational corporation &#40;MNC&#41;. An MNC may not realise the full profit potential of licensing intangibles intra&#45;firm, however, under suboptimal negotiated transfer pricing schemes. Our negotiated transfer pricing bargaining structure unlocks this potential by producing an optimal transfer price and larger optimal intra&#45;firm licensed quantity. Increased licensing of intangibles intra&#45;firm across borders produces a greater potential tax savings&#47;consolidated after&#45;tax profit gain per unit of transfer price adjustment, creating a context where MNCs feel a greater imperative or incentive to move beyond legal tax avoidance toward evasion.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043874</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 239 - 269</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Peter C. Dawson; Stephen M. Miller</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>P.O. Box 612831, Dallas, 75261&#45;2831, Texas, USA. &#39; College of Business, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 Maryland Parkway, Las Vegas, 89154&#45;6005, Nevada, USA</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>negotiated transfer pricing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>NTP</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>licensing intangibles</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>arm&#39;s length royalty</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>decentralised decision making</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>multinational corporations</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>MNCs</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>international trade</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intra&#45;firm trade</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>tax avoidance</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>tax evasion</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>bargaining structure</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>marginal licensing cost</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intra&#45;firm licensing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>cross&#45;border licensing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>international transfer pricing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>optimal transfer prices.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>239</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>269</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043879">
<title>Granted patents have the same level of inventive step&#63; A new approach to distinguish patent protection based on the level of inventive step</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43879</link>
<description>According to recent surveys, there exist numerous patent applications in countries, such as Japan and the USA. Out of the total granted patents, there are so many patents which are not utilised on the product and its market. In this research, we analysed the different levels of inventive step or non&#45;obviousness especially focusing on the difference of the ratio of office actions made by EPO and JPO between European enterprises and Japanese enterprises whether the office actions include the prior arts related to the said invention filed as a patent application. Under the current patent law, all patents granted have the same level of protection. Considering the basicness or improvementness of patents, it is proposed based on this research to distinguish the level of inventive step or non&#45;obviousness together with the level of protection, which gives big impact on legal structures together with how the patent law should be amended in the future.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43879"><b>Granted patents have the same level of inventive step&#63; A new approach to distinguish patent protection based on the level of inventive step</b></A><br />Yoshitoshi Tanaka; Daphne Jue Wang<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 270 - 282</i><br />According to recent surveys, there exist numerous patent applications in countries, such as Japan and the USA. Out of the total granted patents, there are so many patents which are not utilised on the product and its market. In this research, we analysed the different levels of inventive step or non&#45;obviousness especially focusing on the difference of the ratio of office actions made by EPO and JPO between European enterprises and Japanese enterprises whether the office actions include the prior arts related to the said invention filed as a patent application. Under the current patent law, all patents granted have the same level of protection. Considering the basicness or improvementness of patents, it is proposed based on this research to distinguish the level of inventive step or non&#45;obviousness together with the level of protection, which gives big impact on legal structures together with how the patent law should be amended in the future.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043879</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 270 - 282</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Yoshitoshi Tanaka; Daphne Jue Wang</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Graduate School of Innovation Management, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 3&#45;3&#45;6 Shibaura, Minato&#45;ku, Tokyo 108&#45;0023, Japan. &#39; Graduate School of Innovation Management, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 3&#45;3&#45;6 Shibaura, Minato&#45;ku, Tokyo 108&#45;0023, Japan</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>basic patents</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>improvement patents</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>inventive step</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>non&#45;obviousness</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>prior arts</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intellectual property management</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>different protection level</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patent law amendment</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patent protection</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patent law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>protection levels.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>270</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>282</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043880">
<title>The capability of intellectual property disputes of being settled by ADR&#58; theoretical and practical approach under Jordanian law</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43880</link>
<description>Rights pertaining to intellectual property have been mainly categorised, under Jordanian laws, to cover trademarks, patents, copyright, unfair competition and trade secrets, integrated circuits, geographical indicators, industrial designs and models, and the new plants classifications. Alternative dispute resolution have also been categorised under Jordanian laws to cover arbitration, mediation and conciliation. This article examines the reliability and viability of alternative dispute resolution to resolve intellectual property disputes. It answers the question whether disputes arising over intellectual property rights can only be resolved using alternative dispute resolution. In other words, do intellectual and industrial property disputes have special nature which makes them different from the nature of other disputes to be resolved in a particular way&#63; It is found that the disputes arising over the exploitation of the intellectual property rights can be resolved by alternative dispute resolution, and it is also found that it is possible to apply both arbitration and mediation laws to resolve intellectual property disputes as far as Jordan is concerned.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43880"><b>The capability of intellectual property disputes of being settled by ADR&#58; theoretical and practical approach under Jordanian law</b></A><br />L.M. Daradkeh; Ala Elden Kasawneh<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 283 - 296</i><br />Rights pertaining to intellectual property have been mainly categorised, under Jordanian laws, to cover trademarks, patents, copyright, unfair competition and trade secrets, integrated circuits, geographical indicators, industrial designs and models, and the new plants classifications. Alternative dispute resolution have also been categorised under Jordanian laws to cover arbitration, mediation and conciliation. This article examines the reliability and viability of alternative dispute resolution to resolve intellectual property disputes. It answers the question whether disputes arising over intellectual property rights can only be resolved using alternative dispute resolution. In other words, do intellectual and industrial property disputes have special nature which makes them different from the nature of other disputes to be resolved in a particular way&#63; It is found that the disputes arising over the exploitation of the intellectual property rights can be resolved by alternative dispute resolution, and it is also found that it is possible to apply both arbitration and mediation laws to resolve intellectual property disputes as far as Jordan is concerned.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043880</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 283 - 296</dc:source>
<dc:creator>L.M. Daradkeh; Ala Elden Kasawneh</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Commercial Law&#45;Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, United Arab Emirates University, P.O. Box 15551, Al&#45;Ain, UAE. &#39; Faculty of Law, Yarmouk University, P.O. Box 566, Irbid, Jordan</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>Jordanian law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>alternative dispute resolution</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>ADR</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>arbitration</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>mediation</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>conciliation</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intellectual property rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>IPR disputes</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>trademarks</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>patents</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Jordan</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>industrial property disputes.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>283</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>296</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043875">
<title>Polymorph patents; how strong they are really&#63;</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43875</link>
<description>Pharmaceuticals can exist in various solid forms include &#39;true polymorphs&#39;, solvates, desolvates and amorphous solids. Screening of pharmaceuticals early on in drug discovery to find out all possible solid forms has significant connotations. Any inadvertent production of the &#39;wrong&#39; polymorph at the crystallisation stage or any transformations of one form to another during dosage form processing, storage and scale&#45;up can result in pharmaceutical dosage forms which are either ineffective or toxic. The second&#45;generation patent filed by pioneer companies generally claim newer crystal forms as an important aspect in maintaining favourable intellectual property position thereby delaying the generic entry. There are numerous instances where innovator companies have acquired patents on particular polymorphic form, which extend beyond the expiry of basic molecule&#39;s patent. In such instances, allows filing of ANDA with paragraph IV certification, provided the solid form discovered by the generic manufacturer bypasses innovator&#39;s patent. Successful paragraph IV filing provides exclusive marketing rights for 180 days to the generic manufacturer, and a healthy market share. This article provides in depth analysis of polymorph patents with case examples evaluating that whether these polymorphic patents are really important in qualitative terms or just a ploy to stifle the generic entry.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=43875"><b>Polymorph patents; how strong they are really&#63;</b></A><br />Prasad Vure<br /><i>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 297 - 306</i><br />Pharmaceuticals can exist in various solid forms include &#39;true polymorphs&#39;, solvates, desolvates and amorphous solids. Screening of pharmaceuticals early on in drug discovery to find out all possible solid forms has significant connotations. Any inadvertent production of the &#39;wrong&#39; polymorph at the crystallisation stage or any transformations of one form to another during dosage form processing, storage and scale&#45;up can result in pharmaceutical dosage forms which are either ineffective or toxic. The second&#45;generation patent filed by pioneer companies generally claim newer crystal forms as an important aspect in maintaining favourable intellectual property position thereby delaying the generic entry. There are numerous instances where innovator companies have acquired patents on particular polymorphic form, which extend beyond the expiry of basic molecule&#39;s patent. In such instances, allows filing of ANDA with paragraph IV certification, provided the solid form discovered by the generic manufacturer bypasses innovator&#39;s patent. Successful paragraph IV filing provides exclusive marketing rights for 180 days to the generic manufacturer, and a healthy market share. This article provides in depth analysis of polymorph patents with case examples evaluating that whether these polymorphic patents are really important in qualitative terms or just a ploy to stifle the generic entry.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJIPM.2011.043875</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 297 - 306</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Prasad Vure</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Dr. Reddy&#39;s Laboratories Limited IPDO&#45;Intellectual Property Management, Innovation Plaza Survey Nos. 42, 45, 46 &amp; 54, Bachupally, Qutubullapur Mandal, R.R. Dist.   500 072, A.P., India</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>ranitidine hydrochloride</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>abbreviated new drug applications</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>ANDA</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>infrared</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>IR</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>polymorphs</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>pharmaceuticals</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>polymorph patents</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>drug discovery</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>screening</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>intellectual property</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>solid forms</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>paragraph IV filing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>generic entry.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>297</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>306</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-11-27T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>

