Replies to post #113303 on Biotech Values

[tekcor_atnm]

...if Teva has the real goods, and they acquired the real goods without trampling over MNTA IP, then why would Teva be so concerned about such protocols in relation to the litigation?

that is, unless, Teva either does not expect approval, or Teva has indeed trampled MNTA IP.

Could a third possibility be that TEVA does not know for sure if they are infringing -or- have some inkling that the patents are unenforceable against their methods? Then we are back to TEVA proceeding as they have been and letting a judge decide.

[biomaven0]

Teva's version of generic Lovenox, which is manufactured and tested outside of the U.S." That defense disappears as soon as Teva attempts to market in the U.S. (which is the entire basis for the ANDA to begin with).

What if their research and tweaking of the process to manufacture the molecule made use of techniques that overlap MNTA's patent, but the end manufacturing process (including quality control) uses techniques that do not infringe? That would be my guess for one of their defenses.

Peter