Should BOTH Materiality and Intent to deceive be separately proven ?
I still think Materiality and Intent to deceive both are possible in Copaxone case.
when they failed to point out 2 human clinical studies where they concluded 7-24Kda was safe and tolerable to humans
they also conveniently omitted these 2 papers in the earlier patents and then prioritized way at the end of references with typos on titles of both the papers in the later patent.
Depending on how the court proceedings go TEVA may offer a settlement..not sure if Momenta would take it. With this new standard, it maybe 60:40 in Momenta's favor?? earlier it seemed like just high materiality would have done