Replies to post #12610 on Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (MNTA)

[biopearl]

jmkobers, I think you may be oversimplifying here with your interpretation. This SC proceedings are not really about this case specifically although clearly the case is a vehicle for the court to review and define for other courts some fine points of law: how rule 52a must be viewed, whether other cases such as Markman effectively address the law vs fact interpretation allowed to courts at various levels, whether the Circuit Court of Appeals is allowed de novo powers and so on. Your attempt to apply "logic" is not totally applicable here as there are many questions being asked for the SC to define. I don't think the SC is concerned whether Momenta has been wronged or Teva has been. Its much more about big picture issues and our case is caught in the middle by some very skilled legal maneuverings that have resulted in the delays that Teva is looking for. Lets hope for a favorable ruling at the SC level, since remanding itself may ultimately allow for the appeals courts to find "clear error" in MNTAs favor but at the expense of the clock so at that point Teva has won anyway. Please understand that these comments are from a NON lawyer who has enjoyed trying to learn more about how our court system works by reviewing the statutes and pertinent legal briefs, and who has been very appreciative of mouton and others who have graciously helped me abandon my overly simplified early approach in trying to understand this case. bp