News Focus
News Focus
icon url

ralphey

06/01/21 10:58 AM

#341617 RE: johngnatt #341610

Yes JOhn - one has to wonder why the SC doesnt sit back and contemplate on the whole the generic agenda ( you know something like - look at the entire picture). If indeed all of these generic copy cat medications are so obvious - why dont any of them come to that conclusion before the brand name ?

I am certain there have been at least 100 generic drugs that have had this happen. This is equivalent to flipping a coin 100 times and only getting heads ( ie not ONCE has a generic seen the "obviousness" before a brand name paid for the research)

What are the odds of this happening ? .... 1 in 2^100. That’s 1 in 1,267,650,600,228,229,401,496,703,205,376.



Yet out esteemed judiciary believes this is "OBVIOUS"

It may be hilarious but its not obvious
icon url

sts66

06/01/21 6:01 PM

#341715 RE: johngnatt #341610

One little problem there - that was from a dissenting judge - obviously the other judges disagreed that the four Graham factors weren't applied properly. This is the kind of crap the SC needs to step into and clean up with our appeal.