Biotech Values

[tinkershaw]

http://www.orangebookblog.com/2007/11/index.html

zipjet, I could not find the article in question, but this one will do and I see it has links to the briefs and other information regarding the issues raised on the appeal. I'll have to review it and get to the bottom of it myself.

From this article you can see how one might come away with the impression that the burden of proof is the key issue in the appeal, and since that would be a matter of law, the appellate court would have no problem sending it back down with new instructions on the burden of proof if they felt the trial court got it wrong. If that were the case, then potentially very dangerous.

From reading the article some more it sounds like that is not the case and it is specific factual findings being appealed, which for the loser in a case like this is usually the sign of something desperate to try to get an appellate court to de novo review factual findings.

I'll read the briefs and see what I come up with.

Everyone is assuming that Teva is going to win this appeal. That is a dangerous thing to do. I once had a State Supreme Court rule against me on an issue that was so obvious an blatantly apparent that I am still fuming to this day. It was a simple personal jurisdiction issue, and the State Supreme Court basically threw International Shoe and all its progeny out to reach the result they wanted.

When it comes to patent appeals, the appellate court is known for being conservative, and very stringent on getting their process correct, and if I recall correctly, something like 52% of decisions have been overturned. They have no trouble overturning patents.

I am very interested in regard to personal financial concerns as many on this board are about MNTA as it clearly has tremendous upside iffffff, just a few things go their way. The first thing must be this appellate decision.

I'll get back after reviewing the briefs.

Tinker