Following up on the comments in #msg-67827759, I revisited a few cases of generic-drug litigation pertaining to formulation patents. In general, these cases boil down to something as mundane as whether the salt form employed by the defendant is covered by the broad language in the plaintiff’s patent.
That’s a far cry from the complex issues inherent in MNTA’s process patents for Lovenox (and most other manufacturing-process patents). Thus, I continue to find the rationale behind your prediction of a single-digit royalty in the Lovenox case (#msg-67824288) to be misguided. Regards, Dew
“The efficient-market hypothesis may be the foremost piece of B.S. ever promulgated in any area of human knowledge!”