Zipjet, in light of the reasonable inference from TEVA's PR that no product has yet entered the U.S. because it is made and tested abroad, I think my earlier hypothesis that:
>>At the moment, I would expect TEVA to file a motion to dismiss (1) for failure of the complaint and its exhibits to state a jurisdictional case or controversy, and (2) for asking the District Court for an advisory opinion. <<
now holds more water. 35 U.S.C. 271(a) and (g) cannot apply until product made by a process that is patented in the U.S. actually enters the U.S.