I agree about the redacted material.
But what we do know is that after 3 years of no similar legal challenges to the HW safe harbor provision the court finally sought external guidance from the government, the SG, and got it.
The SG, as I read it, is clear and unequivocal in favor of patent protection of MNTA, finally interpreting legislative purpose (just as Judge Raider originally did in 2012) in fact they even modify (strengthen?) the MNTA argument. It is a well written piece and should be clear to the CAFC.
That Amphastar is not pleased is not surprising. After finally getting an opinion from the SG, it seems a bit arrogant, IMHO, to accuse them of being wrong and faulty in their analysis.
If CAFC doesn't rule in MNTA's favor (and remand to DC for a trial) they would be blatantly ignoring the advice they sought which would appear to be clear rationale for an "en banc" review. IMHO.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
