Replies to post #319740 on Avid Bioservices Inc (CDMO)

[Protector]

north, you wrote:

Of course you can sell technology with or without 1) a patent application or 2) a patent embracing that technology...trade secrets or other confidential info is an example.

But ask yourself...trade secrets can be reverse-engineered and duplicated by any competitor....Coke formula is the exception to that concept I know of...complete formula is still locked in a safe somewhere, and a very few employees know only parts of the formula.

When the patent is filed and published that IP cannot enter the Trade Secret road anymore. At the best the making of the Bavituximab molecule (which if I remember well is NOT the mandatory example given in the patent but is covered by the generic claims) could remain a trade secret.

However, I think (to be verified) that the FDA has disclosure rules after 10 years. Not sure when those 10 years start. But with PPHM producing Bavituximab in Avid I doubt that know-how spreading techniques like the ones you sited for Coca Cola Beverage Company can still be put in place.

But yes, PPHM could transfer the right of the Alan Scrout et All patent if UTSW terms (probably inside an EDGAR CTO) do not prevent it.

On a side note, I think Gillette is another example of a trade secret that has not been broken. Neither Wilkinson (Gillette's biggest competitor) nor the complete Chinese market that jumped on raser blade manufacturing produces anything near Gillette's Quality. I bought 10 different packs via AliExpress and all weren't near as sharp as Gillette's however at 10% of Gillette's price.

Furthermore both are a good illustration that new technology does not always place older technology in the same field outside the market.
Gillette is still there with its blades never the less the electric razer revolution. And it comes again, IMO, back to the sharpness and the resulting clean shave you get with Gillette blades.

So Immuno did not flush away Chemo/Radio, even after 100 years and Nobel Prices in the field such as for Jules Bordet, however with CAR-T there seems to be an opening. PPHM should nicely fit in there.

AIMO

[jbainseky]

Wrong. The patent application, even a provisional patent application offers protection, not as strong as a granted patent, but enough. That is part of the reason patent applications attempt to be extremely broad when describing the claims. If someone knowingly "copies" the technology and makes money off it before the patent is granted, they would be subject to patent infringement IN THE EVENT the patent is granted and the part copied was covered by the final claims.

This is why when you are patenting a material thing (PPHM's application is for a process)when you have applied for the patent, you are permitted to mark the object "patent pending" to make others aware it is believed to be protected technology.

This is also why anyone interested in buying the PPHM's exosome technology has to not only evaluate if the process works, but also validate/assess the strength of the patent claims etc. not a simple process and takes time.

FFTT

JBAIN