Replies to post #37719 on Cytogenix (fka CYGX)

[nearlynapping]

Cacher, there is still a big difference between a patent application and a granted patent. The protection afforded by the application is simply not the same. Now after you have a patent granted you want to constantly file new modifications to protect the technology and extend the effective patent life. The bottom line is that I don't see anything good about patent applications sitting for years.

[david02835]

Cacher, I couldn't agree more. Let the bio-tech guys do their stuff and get us a business leader who knows the public company arena to take us to the next level! Right on!

[Tatonkano62]

I'm with you cacher

[downregul8]

Cacher - From the USPTO (again - see post 21363 – looks like this was discussed about a year ago.)

“The term of the shall be generally 20 years from the date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States or, if the application contains a specific reference to an earlier filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121 or 365(c), from the date of the earliest such application was filed, and subject to the payment of maintenance fees as provided by law. A maintenance fee is due 3 1/2, 7 1/2 and 11 1/2 years after the original grant for all patents issuing from the applications filed on and after December 12, 1980. The maintenance fee must be paid at the stipulated times to maintain the patent in force. After the patent has expired anyone may make, use, offer for sale, or sell or import the invention without permission of the patentee, provided that matter covered by other unexpired patents is not used. The terms may be extended for certain pharmaceuticals and for certain circumstances as provided by law.”

Sitting on intellectual property is a bad idea for market share even if the there were a chance of getting extended patent protection. Time to bring these products to market – all of them. I’ve questioned the market viability of Simplivar in the past because of unknown final price levels but there is likely a market for the new class of antibiotics announced on September 28, 2004 - “CytoGenix, Inc. Files US Patent Application for New Class of Antibacterial Agent” - even at a high price per dose. cygx claims lack of funding to support all of this development activity but then issues themselves raises over the last couple years that would have covered at least two additional scientists to continue the work on these other products.

As far as sharing the business plan – I care less about seeing the current one than knowing that they are spending more time executing it – than changing it every year. It’s true that they are trying to commercialize synDNA now but it’s also true that they were trying to commercialize other products in previous years that have now been “shelved.” Pursuing synDNA is a good thing – but not at the expense of delaying other viable products. I have long felt that a more experienced management team would better serve this company.