Biotech Values

[RockRat]

Took me a while to get back to this Copaxone patent term stuff, and forgive me for beating this horse one last time . . . Teva is indeed throwing curves. Clearly they are referring to an EU patent when they say Sept. 2015. The Orange Book patents do indeed expire when you say. The '08 patent is tricky. The part covering matter that is not new also expires then, but the part covering matter that is new expires on May 15th, 2015 (if Teva did not have the EU patent that expires in Sept. of that year, they would no doubt use this date in their PR as the next best thing; since they do have that EU patent, we don't see that date in the PR). However, a) as you point out, this is not in the OB and not going to be in the Copaxone litigation, and b) the new stuff does not necessarily prevent someone from using the old stuff in that patent after May '14. All of this applies to 6,048,898, as well.

The reason I went through this exercise in patent term determination was to further gauge Teva's credibility capital. The 9/21 PR is another technically, just barely correct, misleading statement. I wasn't so sure of that at first. Agree no further bandwidth need be given to the topic now.

Aside, before anybody asks: no I have not figured out what is different about the CIP versus the parent application. I'd have to squint harder and longer than is medically advisable.

Regards, RockRat