Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Protector]

Maybe before you run to Belgium to pound on whatever desk your were going to pound on you may first read the argumentation in the reply to Bungler.

There is the LEGAL aspect (I learned from Bungler and am great full for it) and there is my INITIAL statement that for a drug that is NOT approved yet PPHM would need to permission from Merck.

So Bungler demonstrated that, if this were the case, it is for sure NOT because any legal restraints (say the fact that PPHM would not be allowed to without Merck permission).

However, as you can see in the response to Bungler, there may/or may not, be OTHER reasons, more practically, why PPHM would still need the permission or at least collaboration of Merck to do a PD-1 pre-clinical.

My only conclusion at the time was the Merck would then be better aware/inform or even related to the PD-1 pre-clinical.

PS: And as for the BTD, and in the interest of honest argumentation. Time proves that the BTD could not have been filed for at the time OR it was and was rejected, because we are since LONG outside of the window in which the FDA would have had to reply to it. If they filed later or still have to I'll figure the only way we'll know will be when the PRed it. After Garnick's comments on the last annual and given the current strategy that seems to become more outlined, I see no future for BTD unless Breast.