I don't have an informed opinion on Amphastar's argument that Momenta has little or no lost profits, but it does seem to me that their arguments prove too much. For example, in their motion for summary judgement on this issue, they argue that the Momenta failed to prove any demand for the patented method because, like Teva, Amphastar could have performed the analysis outside the US without violating the patent. But even if that were so, it would have taken time and $$ to persuade the FDA to allow the testing outside the US