News Focus
News Focus
Post# of 257253
Next 10
Followers 77
Posts 4790
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/06/2003

Re: mouton29 post# 128834

Thursday, 10/20/2011 8:13:05 AM

Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:13:05 AM

Post# of 257253
MNTA - Translation double check:

The good news is that it looks like Ampha is, in fact, violating patent 866 - probably using the HPLC method (which is claim 50 something).

The bad news is that without some really good lawyering by Momenta they won't win:

a) It appears like Momenta, in the original patent filing, mentioned that HPLC wasn't good enough as a measurement technique to measure the un-natural sugars.

b) The entire patent being claimed is explicitly about making manufacturing decisions based upon the signature of certain un-natural sugars. But generally Momenta's only description of those sugars is a description of them as whatever causes Peak 9 in a CE plot. Is this specific enough... or not? Note that they are also somewhat unspecific about exactly what the signature is.

As Mouton noted - it really is impossible to figure out where this is likely to go without seeing the Momenta filings too. I can certainly envision strong counters to each of the above two Amphastar assertions - but what matters is what Momenta does.

Trade Smarter with Thousands

Leverage decades of market experience shared openly.

Join Now