Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
ryman, but where is the corresponding rise in pps? ;)
This first oral argument lasted about one hour - bottom line for counsel on both sides is that they have been given two weeks to file a new brief. This process (as it has been noted before here by myself and casual trader) is just getting started.
"what does either company hope to gain from further litigation?"
One burning question that will be answered in the coming months, will be 'is the patent infringement filing by Antares enough to delay Medacs' entry into the market place? Yes, the CP and TI did not work, but the original "First Complaint" v Medac is still working its way through the legal process with many steps to go through (assuming their is no pending settlement) and also, the "Notice of Appeal by Plaintiff Antares Pharma, Inc" is in process. Will these things give Medac pause to launch, will these things motivate Medac to settle and visa versa??
I don't think any gain from further litigation will be known for a few months. Until then, the wheels of justice, so to speak, are in motion. But ultimately, imo, there will be a settlement between both parties.
I think what learning curve may be referring to are the Form 4 filings by those insiders, meaning they were able to buy shares because they are not in possession of material non-public news (or meaning 'nothing material is going on' which enabled their purchases.
I have noted in the past that if we see insider buying, it can very well mean, 'nothing is going on.'
Lets look at who bought recently - 5 insiders and all of them are what I call second tier front liners - all are on the Board of Directors (Roche, Gueth, Garrity, Jacob and Samson). They were able to purchase their shares after earnings during the 'open window.' And they were able to buy because they received in house clearance from the corporate governance committee after confirming they themselves were not currently in possession of material non-public information.
Who did not buy?? None of the front liners on management side - Hobbs, Apple, Sadowski and Jooste to name a few. Why did they not buy during this open window after earnings release? Most likely because those insiders were and are in possession of material non-public information.
"Missed it by that much!" Goes the saying from an old TV sitcom. Sorry that you didn't stick around a little while longer and to capture a greater pps before selling.
Nice day today! And btw, nothing new to report litigation wise on both fronts.
Not the post really, but the post leading to the site:
http://www.evaluategroup.com/Universal/View.aspx?type=Report&id={23D6C352-1933-41D7-A788-054D46E19AAA}¶ms=%3CPARAMS%20currencyId=%220%22%3E%3CPARAM%20linkKind=%221%22%20compId=%221019%22%20name=%22allergy%22%20itemId=%225b%22%20/%3E%3C/PARAMS%3E
We know the settlement date is June 2015 - any other detail(s) of the settlement is confidential. I don't trust the information contained on the site above that notes Antares as the company when it should be TEVA and then notes a world wide launch of 9/30/2014. I've seen nothing from TEVA pr about a pending worldwide launch of the generic epipen. If TEVA is not barred from launching world wide as per the settlement date of June 2015, then why aren't they already marketing worldwide? They certainly have the pens in stock.
Getting into the worldwide market (ex US & Canada) would be nice (while not producing very good margins) so I don't assign any meaningful financial benefit to WW. The big bucks is connected with June 2015 and the US/Canada market.
A word about a recent posting on the ymb about a world wide launch of TEVA/ATRS epipen date on 9/30/2014.
Listen up folks. THE SETTLEMENT DATE BETWEEN MYLAN AND TEVA IS/WAS/AND STILL IS JUNE OF 2015. This is a legal and binding date that is applicable between the two companies and it has NO BORDERS! Not even in the Cayman Islands.
Thumb is not needed. To flip off the cap, you do not need a thumb. Those with limited mobility can grip the injector and use the edge of a table to flip off the cap (this is what my cousin does or sometimes he can use both hands and twist it off with his other hand as well). View the video and see how the user grips the device. This is closer to reality than diagrams of a user who has full use of their thumbs.
Yes, the user guide shows animation using the thumb.
Medac has not conducted actual Human User Studies. [Otrexup is specifically designed to be used by RA patients who have moderate-to-severe hand function impairment, which is evidenced by the "Human Factors Usability Study" and "Actual Human Use Study" conducted by Antares.]
Medac conducted: "Evaluation of Patient Performance Using the Metoject Device for Subcutaneous Injection in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)Patient" a Ph I study.
Medac conducted: "Preference Methotrexate (MTX) Pre-filled Syringe Versus Pre-filled Pen in Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)" a Ph 3 study, "An Open-label, Randomized, Two-period Cross-over Study of Repeated Subcutaneous Injections of Methotrexate 50mg/ml Solution Either by a Pre-filled Syringe (Reference) or by a Disposable Pre-filled Pen (Test) to Assess Patient's Preference and Self-injection Experience and to Compare the Local Tolerability in Patients With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis"
Antares conducted: "Actual Human Use of Methotrexate (MTX) Subcutaneously Administered Via the VIBEX™ MTX Auto-Injector Device" a Phase 2, Multi-Center, Open-Label, Single-Dose, Single Arm, In-Clinic Study to Evaluate the Actual Human Use of Methotrexate Subcutaneously Administered Via the VIBEX™ MTX Auto-Injector Device in Adult Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Human Factors Usability Study for OTREXUP completed
• Actual Human Use Study completed
• Two Human Systemic Availability studies conducted including the
recently completed Systemic Availability Study
BD is a syringe/injector making shop on an industrial scale. The BD device is a syringe with a button for activation and an exposed needle and any company can call up BD and get their injector to use for their drug. This is what Medac did, they found a subQ injector that worked for their version then entered into a third party supplier (BD)agreement.
Yes, on paper the BD device is inferior to Antares device. And I think this come to light after Rasuvo actually gets into the market place.
According to whogo's post that I just read on the ymb, I don't get it because he said, the need for an injector for those with limited hand dexterity is BS. So I guess the 'usability study' was all BS and I guess my cousin who suffers from RA and whose thumbs are frozen and can only grip things can simply hold the Rasuvo injector in his hand then slam his forehead down onto the button to activate it.
Lets also remember the detail of the Rasuvo device itself. It is basically an 'off-the shelf' hand injector modified with a button for activation. State of the art injector? Not hardly. RA sufferers with impaired hand function CANNOT use the device. It is triggered by a button that has to be pressed by the thumb.
Is any one else as tired as I am about comments that Rasuvo will be so successful (and from many posts on the pos ymb, wildly successful RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE versus Otrexup), when they have yet to form a sales force, market their product and start showing scripts week over week/month over month?
Did Antares envision competition in this space? Yep, per many past 10-k's noting specifically Medac. Was that potential competition factored into their own proforma? Yep. Has Antares screwed up on anything with their product and launch? Yep. Did and are they learning from the mechanics of their launch? Yep. Are they "tweaking" things as they discover them along the way, just like LeRoux Jooste stated in the RBC Conference back in February? Yep. Is Antares perfect in everything they do? Nope. Do they learn? Yep.
Welcome to the art of doing business in the real world. The aspect of business dynamics is not unique to company Antares and of which will also be encountered by Medac with an inferior (when compared side by side to Antares' Vibex device. Remember as well, Medac is not a device maker, Antares is and develops devices to work with specific drugs AND THE END USER PATIENT.
epritske:
Saw your post on the pos ymb about talking to Jack about loko and his list of injectors and what they are, Ovaleap, etc. I've done the same, asking directly and none of what loko states is in atrs world - not a single one.
My choice that I've stated for a while is a diabetes injectable drug for one of the TEVA/ATRS partnerships. I stick with that.
Sent you via linkedin email.
I'm an investor since 2003. Answer is no, never. Future plans of a reverse split?? Seriously(?), no.
Now a question for you. Why would you even think that?
Thanks for supplying the time line detail on the procedural steps, casual trader! I was going from memory.
Now this begs the question of whether this gives pause to Medac in the launch strategy......if the Federal court could reverse the District Court ruling. I personally don't think it will change Medac plans of launching given that I believe it is in their best interest for the litigants to reach a settlement.
Yes I do. Briefly, it is an involved process with filings, follow ups and procedural steps to follow. Off the top of my head, recalling, to get to the 'guts' of the matter will consume about 6 months, meaning getting to the final appeal hearing is an involved due diligence process afforded to both parties.
It means, if they (Medac) goes ahead and launches/markets their product, Rasuvo (which is the subject of the current and ongoing litigation with Antares) and they end up on the losing end, they risk significant financial damages that would be awarded to Antares. Currently, Antares is asking for 'triple' damages.
And to be clear, the denial of Antares Citizens Petition from the FDA along with Antares not getting a temporary injunction to stop Medac, the original patent infringement first filed by Antares against Medac continues to work its way through the Court system. Those two things, the CP and TI, are procedural components that plaintiffs have available to them to use. To not explore those avenues and use them, would mean you have attorneys who are falling asleep at the switch. Any roadblock(s) should be explored and are by patent attorneys worth their salt.
In the end, Medac may very well launch their product before the litigation is settled - and to do so, assuming that some sort of settlement will be agreed upon by the parties, post launch.
Additionally, as reported on clinicaltrials.org
Estimated Enrollment: 150
Study Start Date: July 2014
Estimated Study Completion Date: November 2015
Estimated Primary Completion Date: February 2015 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02159469?term=testosterone&lead=Antares&rank=2
Litigation update:
Antares is appealing (through the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) the recent denial of the Preliminary Injunction.
Also re Medac v ATRS: waiting / pending outcome of the (IPR)Inter Partes Review / decision by the USPTO, then Antares may re-file the motion of stay after the IPR decision.
This commentary is a good read, so thanks for the link.
"Prior to reaching this decision, Judge Robinson found that the patents-in-suit claim a jet injector, as opposed to “an autoinjector or hand-powered syringe.” Id. at 3. Judge Robinson construed a “jet-injector” as “a powered injector used to achieve the delivery of medicaments in a high speed stream, that is, at a pressure, force, and speed sufficiently high so that the medicament exits the needle tip as a fluid jet and not as a bolus. The critical difference between a jet injector and autoinjectors or hand-powered syringes is how the medicament is delivered – dispersed remotely from the needle-tip Uet) rather than deposited in a locus near the needle tip (bolus).” Id. at 4. While Antares presented expert testimony that defendant’s accused device is a jet injection device, Judge Robinson concluded that likelihood of success on the merits was not established on the record before the Court.
What people focus on is the statement "likelihood of success on the merits was not established..." Actually, the Judge (Court) concluded: "The court concludes that Antares has not carried its burden of showing a likelihood of success on the merits."
What most are missing however and in my opinion, is the acknowledgement that the Medac / Becton Dickinson device is a juiced up 'hand-powered syringe.' If I may be permitted, I think of the phrase "a pig with lipstick.' Becton presented during the litigation a document that included an exemplary echography of the tissue taken during the study and reported that the depth of depot "was statistically not different between the auto-injector and the prefilled syringe. Medac's device is a dressed up hand held syringe basically when delivering the medicament into tissue.
Antares home grown device (vs Medac's third party mass produced device available to any pharma company - see my previous post) "delivers medicament by a jet injector, remotely from the needle tip, the medicament does not leave the jet injector as a single drop or bolus and is thus not delivered to a patient as a bolus local to a needle tip. Therefore, by using the jet injectors disclosed herein, a medicament can be dispersed into a subjects tissue MORE EFFICIENTLY." The Medac / Becton device cannot do this as it delivers the medicament in the same manner as a hand held syringe.
Now, does this matter or carry weight to the uniformed, uneducated or ignorant investor? Probably no - particularly right now. What does carry weight right now is "The court concludes that Antares has not carried its burden of showing a likelihood of success on the merits." That is the focus right now. But the blinders will come off eventually.
If and when Medac hits the market with their product, will the above injector differences carry their weight with the Rheumatologists and end users. It will be interesting to see, to read reviews on webmd and make a comparison.
Fellow iHub posters:
Those who currently post on yahoo mb, I encourage you to stop posting on that site as it has become a haven for misfits. Also, I have pretty decent information that besides the usual misfits who end up graying out the board, some posters pose as pro-ATRS but then are also using other alias' to refute (themselves, their other alias)- playing both sides for obvious discourse. I do not trust half of the posters on that site and as a result, I will stop posting there - at least for some time.
Yahoo, while having the avenue of reporting violations, is incompetent in its monitoring of their own rules.
You may think I'm being too or overly serious, (biopete, I think of you when I type that) but posting about my investment is a serious endeavor for me and yahoo doesn't see it that way.
Thanks as well, Cave In Temptor!
Also and as an fyi: the Medac / BD Physioject device could be referred to as a market available subQ injector for any end user who wishes to enlist BD, enter an agreement and use.
http://www.bd.com/pharmaceuticals/products/self-injection/auto-injectors.asp
This is what Medac did with this injector. This is also what EMD Serono is using for their MS drug, Rebif Rebidose.
http://www.rebif.com/pages/starting-rebif/rebif_rebidose
Also, Bristol Myers Squibb is using the BD Physioject in this Ph 1 study for using "Abatacept (Orencia) is a drug used to treat inflammatory signs of arthritis, such as pain, swelling and prolonged joint stiffness. Abatacept belongs to the biologic class of drugs, which means that it works similarly to natural substances in the immune system.
Like other biologic drugs, abatacept was created with genetic-engineering techniques. It helps decrease inflammation in arthritis.
FAST FACTS
Abatacept is a second-line drug that often is used when disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, such as methotrexate, and/or other biologic drugs have failed to control inflammatory arthritis.
No higher risk of serious infections was reported with abatacept compared to other biologic drugs. Further long-term studies are needed.
Reports did not show higher risks of cancer in patients on abatacept. Larger study groups and long-term study will clarify this. Risks in pregnant women are still being studied."
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01890473?term=Physioject&rank=1
Next is the litigation continues along with any Mediation. Also next is the question, will Medac pursue launching at risk.
Rasuvo is approved.
RASUVO
(NDA # 205776)
000 METHOTREXATE MEDAC PHARMA INC Approval 07/10/2014
What I find interesting is the Courts note about ATRS v Medac dosing:
"As to the public interest, Antares avers that its product is available and in use for the same indications as Medac's product, i.e., rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis. Medac responds that the products are not interchangeable as RASUVO provides additional dosing flexibility not offered through OTREXUP. AS OVER 90% OF PRESCRIBED DOSES ARE FOR THE STANDARD DOSES THAT ANTARES ALREADY SELLS, THIS FACTOR IS NEUTRAL." (I put the last sentence in all caps for the emphasis and to draw attention to this Court statement)
So, OTREXUP addresses the already 90% standard dosing of mtx available today, does RASUVO's potential market niche only cover the remaining 10%??
FYI: The Court has denied Antares it's Amended Motion for the Preliminary Injunction.
{A preliminary injunction is "an extraordinary remedy that should only be granted in limited circumstance."}
Then we did us both good as between yesterday and this morning, I picked up an additional 200k of shares.
DC - rock and roll!
This is Eamonn Hobbs profile on Linkedin. It is not update to reflect his latest appointment.
Eamonn Hobbs
President at Hobbs Medical Ventures, LLC
Greater New York City AreaMedical Devices
Current
Marvao Medical, Morris Innovative, Hobbs Medical Ventures, LLC
Previous
Delcath Systems, Inc, Cappella Cardiovascular Innovations, Inc., Sentinelle Medical
Education
University of Massachusetts at Lowell
Summary
CEO WITH PROVEN TRACK RECORD
Entrepreneurial and Intrapreneurial senior executive with over 30 years of demonstrated success in profitable medical device business creation, general management, sales and marketing, and product development.
High-integrity, passionate leader known for exceptional abilities in developing strong customer/physician relationships and building top-performing sales and operational teams. Areas of excellence include:
? Product Innovation & Development
? Successful Product Commercialization
? Financial Planning and Operational Performance
? Building Strong Sales Teams
? Influencing Government Policy
Optimizing Business Processes
Mergers and Acquisitions
Operational Integrations
Fund Raising
ANGIODYNAMICS, INC., (NASDAQ: ANGO), Queensbury, NY 1988 – FEBRUARY, 2009
Co-Founder, President, CEO, & Director
Co-founded a very successful medical device company that designs, develops, manufactures and markets minimally invasive devices for the targeted treatment of cancer and vascular disease. Company went from start up to leadership market share in core products against much larger, heavily entrenched competition.
Intrapreneurial endeavor of growing the business from a wholly-owned, green field start-up to an international stand-alone profitable public company, with over 600 employees at 4 facilities and fiscal year 2009 projected revenues of over $200 million.
? Company focuses on serving the needs of Interventional Radiologists, Interventional Neuroradiologists, Cardiologists, Surgeons, Nephrologists, Oncologists, and Dermatologists, with peripheral and neuro vascular, vascular access and cancer therapy medical devices.
? Worldwide sales and marketing, with direct sales forces both domestically and outside the USA (OUS), and additional stocking distributors OUS.
? Conducted extremely successful IPO (NASDAQ symbol ANGO) in May 2004, dramatically increasing shareholder value and liquidity.
Specialties:Medical Device Innovations and Commercialization
Industry Leadership
Customer/Physician Relationships
Unparalleled Recognition - SIR Fellowship
Business Development - Fund raising, IPO, Secondary
Mergers & Acquisitions - Numerous w/integrations
Experience
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Marvao Medical
January 2014 – Present (6 months)Galway, Ireland
Marvao has developed a potentially game changing platform technology that seeks to dramatically reduce catheter infections by revolutionizing how tunneled catheters are placed and maintained. In initial clinical data comprised of thousands of catheter days, the NexSite tunneling system has demonstrated a zero catheter related blood infection rate, (CRBI) and even more remarkable, NexSite has done this in some of the most challenging applications such as femoral dialysis catheters (which normally have a very high 5-7% CRBI rate). CRBI has risen to be one of the highest profile issues with hospital administrators since it is life threatening, treatment costs are very high but not reimbursed, and reducing the hospital CRBI rate recently became one of the top quality measures that determine each hospital’s across the board reimbursement rate for all of the hospital’s procedures under the new accountable care system. With this in mind, hospital administrators as well as clinicians have placed a very high priority on embracing any new technologies that materially reduce the CRBI rate. The NexSite system can be mated with any tunneled catheter system so it has broad market utility including applications in dialysis and central lines. NexSite Dialysis Catheters very recently received FDA clearance and CE Mark is pending.
Morris InnovativeChairman of the Board
Morris Innovative
December 2013 – Present (7 months)Bloomington, Indiana Area
Morris Innovative has developed and is commercializing two vascular closure device systems called FISH, which stands for Femoral Inserted Sheath Hemostasis. FISH CombiClose is a very unique combination working sheath/closure sheath system. The FISH InstaClose was very recently introduced procedure ending exchange system that delivers greatly simplified use, and shorter clinician learning curve. Both systems have multiple unique features and benefits that highly differentiate them from the competition. Morris has sold over 30,000 systems in the US so far, and recently received CE Mark approval, so the technology is very well proven.
President
Hobbs Medical Ventures, LLC
November 2013 – Present (8 months)Greater New York City Area
Founded by Eamonn Hobbs, Hobbs Medical Ventures is a consulting firm specializing in developing, delivering and implementing solutions for the medical device and combination medical device/pharmaceutical industries.
Mr. Hobbs is an entrepreneurial senior executive with over 30 years of demonstrated success in profitable medical device business creation, strategy, general management, sales and marketing, and product development.
He is a high-integrity, passionate leader known for exceptional abilities in developing strong customer/physician relationships and building top-performing sales and operational teams.
Areas of excellence include:?
• Strategy
• Product Innovation & Development?
• Successful Product Commercialization?
• Financial Planning and Operational Performance?
• Building Strong Sales Teams?
• Influencing Government Policy?
• Optimizing Business Processes
• Mergers and Acquisitions
• Operational Integrations
• Fund Raising
Board Member
Glens Falls Hospital
February 2013 – Present (1 year 5 months)Glens Falls, New York Area
Glens Falls Hospital provides comprehensive health care services to Warren, Washington, northern Saratoga, Essex, Hamilton, and northern Rensselaer counties. Our 27 regional facilities include health centers in Cambridge, Corinth, Granville, Greenwich, Hoosick Falls, Salem, Whitehall, and Wilton.
Member of the Strategic Planning Committee, Patient Safety and Quality Committee
Member of the Board of Directors
Harmonic Medical, Inc.
2012 – Present (2 years)Toronto, Canada Area
Member of the Audit, Governance and Compensation Committees.
Harmonic Medical is a Toronto based development stage company involved in the development of proprietary ultrasound guided high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) therapy systems.
Member, Board of Directors
Antares Pharma Inc.
2009 – Present (5 years)Ewing, New Jersey
Member Audit and Governance Committees
Antares Pharma, Inc. (NASDAQ: ATRS) is committed to developing and commercializing novel combination (drug and device) products utilizing the company’s unique, advanced drug delivery systems. ATRS products are patient focused: they typically improve safety and efficacy, reduce side effects and enable delivery at a lower dose. Antares advanced drug delivery systems are also well positioned for “life cycle extension” options.
Immediate Prior Chairman of the Board of Directors
Medical Device Manufacturers Association
2005 – Present (9 years)Washington D.C. Metro Area
The Medical Device Manufacturers Association (MDMA) is a national trade association based in Washington, D.C. that represents independent manufacturers of medical devices, diagnostic products and health care information systems. MDMA seeks to improve the quality of patient care by influencing government policy, encouraging the development of new medical technology, and fostering the availability of beneficial innovative products.
Member, Executive, Governance, Membership and Compensation Committees
Delcath Systems, IncPresident & CEO
Delcath Systems, Inc
July 2009 – September 2013 (4 years 3 months)
Delcath Systems and its proprietary targeted drug delivery system are at the forefront of the regional treatment of cancer. The Company's technology, known as ChemoSaturation (CS) for Percutaneous Hepatic Perfusion (PHP), allows physicians to deliver significantly higher doses of anti-cancer drugs to the site of disease without exposing the patient's entire body to those same potent levels of drug. Initial clinical results from studies treating cancer in the liver confirm that delivering more drug to the tumor site, and less to the other regions of the body, enhances tumor shrinkage with improved quality of life over systemic cancer therapies. PHP is approved and is pursuing reimbursement in the EU and is currently undergoing testing in Phase III and Phase II clinical trials for a variety of cancers of the liver.
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Cappella Cardiovascular Innovations, Inc.
2009 – August 2013 (4 years)Galway, Ireland
Chairman of the Board (only independent member)
Early commercial stage (EU), venture capital backed company with a unique solution to treating coronary artery side branch disease.
Sentinelle MedicalMember of the Board of Directors
Sentinelle Medical
2008 – 2010 (2 years)Toronto, Canada Area
Member, Audit and Compensation Committees.
Sentinelle Medical Inc., established in 2004, is a private company based in Toronto, Canada that provides a suite of very high performance MR coils, and software solutions for GE, Toshiba and Siemens, providing health care providers with a fully integrated breast imaging and treatment planning system that result in the highest quality of patient care. Company achieved profitability and positive cash flow in Q4 2008. Very successful exit for investors upon sale of company to Hologic.
AngioDynamicsCo-founder, President & CEO
AngioDynamics
February 1988 – March 2009 (21 years 2 months)Glens Falls, New York Area
Co-founded a very successful medical device company that designs, develops, manufactures and markets image guided, minimally invasive devices for the targeted treatment of cancer and vascular disease. Company went from green field start up to leadership market share with premium positioning in core products against much larger, heavily entrenched competition.
Member of the Board of Directors
American College of Phlebology Foundation
2006 – 2009 (3 years)Washington D.C. Metro Area
Founding member of charitable scientific research and education foundation established in collaboration with its parent medical specialty society, American College of Phlebology, for the purpose of advancing the treatment of venous disease through research and education.
Assisted in the creation of the society’s first Strategic Plan.
Numerous committee memberships
Board Member
Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation
2002 – 2008 (6 years)Washington D.C. Metro Area
SIRF is a charitable scientific research and education foundation established in collaboration with its parent medical specialty society, Society of Interventional Radiology, for the purpose of advancing interventional radiology through research and education.
Sole Industry member of the Board; numerous committee positions held throughout tenure.
SVP/GM AngioDynamics Division
EZEM
1988 – 2004 (16 years)
VP Marketing
NAMICMedical Device Company focused on serving the needs of Interventional Cardiologists. Attained
1985 – 1988 (3 years)Glens Falls, New York Area
Medical Device Company focused on serving the needs of Interventional Cardiologists. Attained worldwide market leadership in Angiographic Manifolds and Control Syringes. Sold to Pfizer in 1992, later sold to Boston Scientific in 1997, and AngioDynamics in 2012.
Founder, CEO and President
Hobbs Medical, Inc.
1983 – 1985 (2 years)Stafford Springs, CT
Secured venture capital funding, founded and developed a profitable medical device firm focusing on trans-endoscopic interventional devices for Gastroenterologists. Sold company in 1985; remains in operation today as a private company: www.hobbsmedical.com.
Honors & Awards
Francis Cabot Lowell Alumni Award for Outstanding Achievement in Business
University of Massachusetts, Lowell
September 2010
Additional Honors & Awards
Honorary Fellow, Society of Interventional Radiology
All around impressive interview! Thank you QD. A future follow up (as noted at the end) would be nice - or how about 4x / yr, once a quarter...
Diamond C:
Nice to read a post from you - as well as reading well constructed posts from our bsav (along with a few of the others)! Dont have too much fun without me @DFW....
Holding onto my shares here...
We should hear very soon of the granting of prelim injunction barring Medac from entering the market place pending outcome of this case.
Two additional ATRS patents were added to the original Antares v Medac complaint, the '846 patent and the '847 patent.
Correct ryman, that is the injector slated for the US. The EU, from what I've seen, its a different animal.
"And i will let you do the homework on similar cases... :o)
You are our legal advisor (Bsav is too busy..)"
That's way too much pressure on me ryman!
Beats me ryman. I'm going to guess that they are not viewing this as a material type event and only would view as material if the FDA acts in favor of the petition, then they would do a PR splash.
The flip side would be to make this news worth (the filing to the FDA of the Citizens Petition) and release a PR that states they did this, but then potential have to follow up and then release a PR saying the FDA rejected it. I guess they are keeping this 'down low' until the FDA takes action.
chp writes:
"For your edification, here is the exact language of Section 17(b):
"(b)
It shall be unlawful for any person, by the use of any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or by use of the mails, to publish, give publicity to, or circulate any notice, circular, advertisement, newspaper, article, letter, investment service, or communication which, though not purporting to offer a security for sale, describes such security for a consideration received or to be received, directly or indirectly, from an issuer, underwriter, or dealer, without fully disclosing the receipt, whether past or prospective, of such consideration and the amount thereof."
SEC Section 17 refers to 'security based swaps'. That is the subject of Section 17. Security base swaps are subject to (b) which states 'it shall be unlawful....WITHOUT FULLY DISCLOSING THE RECEIPT'....'and the amount thereof.'
For grins, lets play lawyer, judge and jury, cast a wide net and say this SEC Section applies to all "Consultant Agreements" for anyone named in a publicly traded companies 10k. If a Consultant Agreement is disclosed in the 10k along with the amount, then letter of law has been satisfied.
Next witch hunt??
1. How are they free Snizzle?? Define that for me.
2. Off limits and FAIR GAME for what exactly?
3. Play a serious part in the demise of SCRC share price? I've lost 3 cents now since first buying in. Tell me, who do I sue? Who do I blame for any market fluctuation? When I'm ahead on my investment, do I need to give money back to someone?
Give me a break! U got anything else?
Trueheart:
How do you read what is below from coolerheadsprevail? Is this a threat? Thinly veiled threat?
"What do you think of this chap:
On December 16, 2013, we issued 250,000 restricted shares of common stock to Sean Fitzgibbons under a consulting agreement with regard to investor relations services.
I sure hope that he doesn't have a dayjob as an important professional such as -- oh I don't know, let's say an attorney for example -- for a major corporation such as -- oh I don't know, let's say Walmart for example -- who will have no problem replacing him (or her, LOL) as they have zero tolerance for employees whose names show up in formal SEC complaints...
Rather than drinking wine in Tuscany arguing over whether it should be filet or lobster for dinner, this Fitzy and JOSEPH ZAMPETTI can look forward to trading cigarettes in federal prison arguing about whose turn it is to be the groom or bride...
Hey all you new shareholders from ATRS who were invited to invest here in SCRC, this post is dedicated to you..."
That's not necessary whogo. That would be like asking rymankoly to delete himself because he plays gaps and posts about them.
Once put into place, changing or canceling those 10b5 plans is not recommended and could also trigger an SEC investigation. ie, insider see's something good or bad on the horizon and tries to change or cancel the 19b5 plan....not a good idea.
Probably one of the best articles I've seen written on the subject.
Can insiders purchase on the open market (when not having material info) while also having a set in place 10b5-1 trading plan? I also asked Jack if and while Wotton has a 10b5-1 trading plan in place for exercising his options, can he also have a buy plan in place? "No, he can't do that."
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/07/10b5-1.asp