InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

ThomasS

09/06/10 11:08 PM

#103564 RE: DewDiligence #103563

Dew, many thanks; however, I cannot access the 6th document.
R,
T
(delete)
icon url

ThomasS

09/06/10 11:51 PM

#103567 RE: DewDiligence #103563

MNTA: After perusing various docs, one gets the distinct impression that:
1. Sandoz/MNTA know more about a given batch of Copaxone than Teva
or
2. Teva is being borderline deceitful
or
both.

In any event, I still believe this remains bullish for MNTA and still believe the perceived delay increases the likelihood of a SJ against Teva.
icon url

DewDiligence

09/07/10 4:40 PM

#103658 RE: DewDiligence #103563

Index to Documents in Copaxone Patent Litigation

[Added today’s order denying Sandoz’s motion for summary
judgment on the basis that the patents in question are indefinite.]



See #msg-54113660 for a list of the patents being litigated. The following documents are in chronological order:


8-28-08 Teva Hatch-Waxman complaint (57 pages)

11/3/08_Sandoz response and counterclaims (50 pages)

12/8/08 Teva reply to Sandoz counterclaims (25 pages)

9/22/09 Table of each party’s proposed claims constructions (8 pages)

10/7/09 Sandoz claims-construction brief (30 pages)

2/9/10 Sandoz amendment to include charge of inequitable conduct (9 pages)

2/10/10 Sandoz reply re molecular weight (4 pages)

2/10/10 Sandoz brief for summary judgment based on patent indefiniteness (14 pages)

9/7/10 Court order denying Sandoz motion for summary judgment (14 pages)
icon url

DewDiligence

09/06/11 8:42 PM

#126224 RE: DewDiligence #103563

NVS/MNTA defense arguments in Copaxone patent case:

Click here for Court document (8/24/11; 6 pages)


A. Non-infringement

B. Invalidity

• Obviousness
• Lack of Enablement
• Indefiniteness*
• Lack of Best Mode

C. Unenforceability (inequitable conduct)


*Summary judgment denied by Court (#msg-54139320, #msg-66626914).

Thanks to ‘mouton29’ for making this document available.