Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[cash2go]

And here is why Peregrine had to settle

On March 28, 2007, CTL filed a cross-complaint, which has been amended three times, alleging that the Company breached the Agreement by improperly terminating the Agreement and double-licensing the technology licensed to CTL to another party, interfered with CTL’s agreements with various Medipharm Entities and unjust enrichment. CTL’s cross-complaint, which seeks $20 million in damages, is in part predicated on the existence of a sublicense agreement between CTL and Shanghai Medipharm. We are challenging the cross-complaint on the basis that not only did CTL fail to allege an agreement with which the Company interfered, they have been unable to produce the alleged sublicense agreement with Shanghai Medipharm despite our repeated demands, and they have not suffered any compensable damages.

On February 22, 2008, Medibiotech Co., Inc. (“Medibiotech”) filed a cross-complaint alleging, as a third party beneficiary, that the Company breached the Agreement by double-licensing the technology licensed to CTL to another party, intentionally interfered with a prospective economic advantage, and unjust enrichment. Medibiotech’s subsidiary, Shanghai Medipharm filed an almost identical cross-complaint on February 17, 2009. These cross-complaints, each seek $30 million in damages, in part predicated on Medibiotech and Shanghai Medipharm being the “Chinese Sponsor” under the Agreement. We intend to bring pre-trial motions in an attempt to dispose of these cross-complaints.

http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHtmlSection1?SectionID=6474944-127879-132497&SessionID=4v_SWeJgWDUmLl7

double-licensing, that is why management wants the mess, they created, hidden. Looks like good news on the trials in China trumps the Chinese market being given away.