Ah, OK. I guess I was focusing on things of nearer term consequence. The actual fact of the expirations won't matter for more 3 1/2 years. I think there's a pretty good chance the patents will be overturned long before they expire.
As to what this disinformation campaign implies, I agree with you up to a point. It might hurt their credibility a bit if someone calls them on it. Why not check with some of the analysts we haven't pestered with the inspection issue, and see if they'll pursue it?
As for trying to put Teva on the spot with the inspection issue, you & rkrw are probably right that we're not likely to get anything but stonewalled. But even if all we accomplish is getting them to stonewall in a public forum, it is worth the small amount of effort; I think more people might start connecting the dots. So it'll be real entertaining to me if one of the analysts we've buttonholed actually pops that question. And who knows, they might actually say something concrete. I doubt it, given the response to one poster from Teva's IR, but a long shot chance (gaffes happen) . . .
And as for the FoB hearings, I don't see the FDA saying anything concrete about what they learn from those until next year. At that point it may have some effect on deal making. I suspect that we won't see an FoB deal for Momenta until the FDA comes out with guidelines regarding implementation of the FoB legislation, but I would really, really, like to be wrong about that. I think a deal for 118 is likely to come first, if it's ever going to.
Regards, RockRat
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
