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.
