Friday, July 15, 2016 1:37:05 AM
i'd suggest most MNTA investors are giving a 0 value to this matter given how the case played out, the time lag, and the uncertainty. (I haven't heard one analyst ask about it.)
18 months should provide plenty of time for MNTA/Sandoz experts to calculate damages which are likely to be substantial. My question is will 3x apply to that amount for willful infringement? (Possibly far greater than the AMPH market cap, but there are other named defendants with deeper pockets.)
My guess, fwiw, is that MNTA will need to plan to see it through and do all the work for a trial in order to maximize value. This will be expensive. (3x weekly approval and launch would mitigate.) Sometime after the trial has begun, but before complete AMPH will become acutely aware of the possibility of worst case damages scenario and seek settlement. That final number could be significant.
A good first step would be to get the bond released and earmark that money for litigation expenses. That should be enough to see it all the way through.
A good second step would be to turn the tables and require a bond from AMPH et. al.
In the meantime there are several other more pressing legal cases that present nearer term catalysts.
FEATURED Cannabix's Breath Logix Alcohol Device Delivers Positive Impact to Private Monitoring Agency in Montana, USA • Apr 25, 2024 8:52 AM
Bantec Reports an Over 50 Percent Increase in Sales and Profits in Q1 2024 from Q1 2023 • BANT • Apr 25, 2024 10:00 AM
Kona Gold Beverages, Inc. Announces Name Change to NuVibe, Inc. and Initiation of Ticker Symbol Application Process • KGKG • Apr 25, 2024 8:30 AM
Axis Technologies Group and Carbonis Forge Ahead with New Digital Carbon Credit Technology • AXTG • Apr 24, 2024 3:00 AM
North Bay Resources Announces Successful Equipment Test at Bishop Gold Mill, Inyo County, California • NBRI • Apr 23, 2024 9:41 AM
Epazz, Inc.: CryObo, Inc. solar Bitcoin operations will issue tokens • EPAZ • Apr 23, 2024 9:20 AM