InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 253368
Next 10
Followers 36
Posts 2628
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/06/2003

Re: DewDiligence post# 121910

Monday, 06/20/2011 7:53:14 AM

Monday, June 20, 2011 7:53:14 AM

Post# of 253368

>>do u have the link to [a] message which discusses why the claim "copolymer of lower molecular weight is less toxic" is obvious?

>No one has addressed this directly, as far as I can recall.



As far as I know, it is a patent claim without a comparative clinical trial to prove the proposition. The level of evidence required by the patent office is far lower than that required by the FDA. The later-patented C with narrower mw range was not subject to clinical studies presented to FDA. TEVA could have done it but it would have been costly and offered some risk of FDA rejection.

TEVA has used two different systems (patenting and drug approval) with their different rules and standards to game the process. Why should a patent of the narrower mw C be allowed to block the wider range mw C (which was approved based on clinical studies)?

IMO the C-story is NOT really about patents. TEVA's patent ploy will fail. It is about getting FDA approval. Will FDA approve m-C?

ij

It is astonishing what foolish things one can temporarily believe if one thinks too long alone ... where it is often impossible to bring one's ideas to a conclusive test either formal or experimental. J.M. Keynes

Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.