InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 3
Posts 231
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/28/2011

Re: biopearl post# 15672

Friday, 07/15/2016 1:37:05 AM

Friday, July 15, 2016 1:37:05 AM

Post# of 20689
bp,
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.