This is the most likely scenario, but Ted don't blow a fuse if it blows up your theory of doom and gloom.
Dr Moro had been working on Recaf and assumed that it would be a 50/50 team approach with Abbott, but Abbott was stumbling in the lab and the heavy lifting was done by BioCurex. Dr Moro's intricate knowledge of Recaf led him to overcome several major hurdles and while he was feverishly working in the lab and attaining great success he was working with Inverness.
Obviously, Recaf was getting great results on the automated instruments and Dr Moro knew he had created much more leverage since his original agreement with Abbott so he was able to get a commitment with upfront royalties from Inverness. Meanwhile, we all know chaos broke out at Abbott and Dr Moro again used his leverage torenegotiate terms with Abbott following his success with Inverness. The entire time all of this was transpiring Dr Moro was scrambling to get new patents and was successful in Europe.
How you can say Dr Moro had the license returned is beyond me. Inverness is a large competitor. Do you honestly think that Abbott would just roll over and let Inverness monopolize the cancer diagnostics market. Think about it. Now look at the results presented at the ISOBM in conjunction with Abbott how could they explain to their shareholders that they had good reason to return the license. Also, read the press release about the new terms Dr Moro initiated, not Abbott, and you will see his confidence was raised when he was successful with Inverness and with his continued success in the lab. Dr Moro wants maximum royalties, because he has the patents and the know-how, not Abbott. There was no return, so stop spreading untrue rumors.
