>>I could well see Teva electing to keep its processing and characterization technology as a trade secret.<<
I've said that myself, but genisi pooh-poohed the idea that they had any exciting trade secrets. It's entirely possible various players in the space are exclusively using "trade secrets." The Procognia patents and the Momenta patents are about the only ones I can find that are relevant; one would suspect there are other ideas being tried.
I would accept that much of Teva knowledge comes from the Procognia collaboration. I would guess they've since put their own folks on this job. Is it possible some other entity is involved in their effort? Yes, it is. Does it make a difference to us? I don't think so, because whatever help it is, it is in the form of trade secrets that we can't begin to divine, so how would this knowledge help us gauge approvabililty? If Teva was trying to keep such alleged information under wraps, they've done a great job of it . . .
Well, I suggested that we save questions for analysts, so now we've got one from randychub. It probably won't get us any farther than mine did, but who knows?
Ask your analysts to ask Teva: "Aside from Procognia, have you gotten any outside help with characterizing your enoxaparin for your ANDA? If so, from whom?"
Y'all feel free to tweak the wording on this; I am done with this thread.
Regards, RockRat
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
