ggwpq, Thanks for posting the article. I have read it. I does provide some insight but it leaves quite a few questions unanswered. How will the narrowing of the timeline effect the opinion of the court? The narrowing does not negate what happened outside of the timeline to be argued. The Hikma response makes clear that the absence of the (not for CVD) label use was at the direction of the FDA. How does this effect our case? Does Hatch Waxman nullify basic patent law when it comes to generic drugs? Will the court need to wait for resolution of GSK v Teva before ruling on the dismissal? Does the court need to wait for the response from the insurance company before ruling? If anyone would like to give an opinion on any of these questions, it would be appreciated. Sleven,
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
