Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

what is the obviousness?

The obviousness is not absolute, but rather is relative to the prior patents that several of the patents at issue in the Copaxone litigation stem from. If the newer patents are deemed to be obvious extensions of the prior patents for someone with expertise in the art, the newer patents are unenforceable.

please no blanket statement or general statements. Which patent(s)?

To answer, I would have to revisit each of the nine patents listed in #msg-54113660, and I’m not sure it’s worth my time to do so. When I looked at these patents in 2010, it was clear to me that several of them were rather trivial extensions of older patents, and that’s why I gave the obviousness/double patenting argument a fairly high chance of succeeding in #msg-59688565.

p.s. See exwannabe’s handicapping of the Copaxone patent case in #msg-59693896. Exwannabe’s analysis makes more sense than mine does if you are going to look at each patent individually.