Replies to post #104172 on Biotech Values

[pollyvonwog]

Teva knows of no outstanding ML questions from the FDA but will not comment on it's future approval at this time.

A bit of a turnaround from a few months ago when TEVA had plenty of comments on it's future approval.

[DewDiligence]

Teva’s Bill Marth may be in spin mode again vis-à-vis the Copaxone litigation. Marth said on today’s webcast that, following the judge’s denial of a summary judgment based on indefiniteness, there are no longer any differences in claims construction between Teva’s interpretation and NVS/MNTA’s interpretation. However, the table in the fourth linked document of #msg-54150823 includes differences in the parties’ interpretations of terms other than those relating to molecular weight, which the judge has not yet ruled on, as far as I know.

[zipjet]

The lawyers will have to listen because they are claiming that many of the claims that Sandoz made regarding Copaxane[sp] are now off the table. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know what I'm talking about.

I heard nothing in the TEVA call that modifies how I see the denial of SJ on indefiniteness.

The MSJ was denied for failure to eliminate material factual issues. Those issues go to the trier of fact which may or may not give life to the legal theory.

TEVA won nothing on the MSJ that is critical to the outcome. However, the ruling may tell us where the Judge is leaning on invalidating the patent for indefiniteness. The trial could change that.

ij