Even Steady's suggestion "After looking at the data the EMA most likely said "we like what we see, you should file so we can take a deeper look because so far your data looks approvable." is a step too far for a regulator to take....IMHO
Regulators are not here to mislead and waste people's time and money. They dont want to waste their time and taxpayer $$ on drugs that have no chance of being approved. That is why companies meet with them before applying, to see if they are in the ballpark in terms of a chance of approval.
Nice straw man argument:
"Missling could not testify that "so and so at the EMA said by all means we want you to submit a slam dunk MAA"?
Bobbob did not say that. try reading the original post next time before commenting