"If TEVA gets their approval and it turns out that they didn't use any of MNTA's patents, will that in some way lessen the value posters ascribe to MNTA's technology?"
Yes, to some degree. Perhaps then 2 companies have IP that can measure very complex molecules by different methods/approaches.. As a biochemist, there are always more than one method of characterizing a given molecule.
"What is the likelihood that MNTA filed their patent lawsuit only because they were doing a stock offering and the lawsuit was more like PR to give more value to their offering? The timing was certainly a bit suspect. And I am sure no company wants to go through discovery, least of all a drug company that has many trade secrets."
Very unlikely as anything to do with the stock offering. As others here have pointed out, it was more likely a strategic offensive move directed at TEVA.
"How would TEVA have learned enough about MNTA's technology to be able to duplicate it? Is it easy to learn the details, I didn't think enough details were in patent filings to be able to duplicate them."
Patents are written is such a vague way that they offer very little in terms of details that a competitor or anyone else can use.
JMHO
