Because this would for all practical purposes neuter MNTA's patent rights.
The same argument has been made about screening patents. I don't believe there is settled law in this area yet, but this isn't an area I know well at all. The Supreme Court I believe specifically declined to reach this issue in Merck.
Teva of course has to be careful what they argue here - it could come back to bite them in the context of the Copaxone patent litigation. Given Copaxone is far more important to them than T-Enox, I would be surprised to see them take a strong position here.
(From a high-level perspective, I've always been puzzled about how Sanofi (enox) and Teva (copax) could argue both that their patents are good but that at the same time that nobody else could possibly produce their product using only the descriptions provided in the patents. Seems to me like they should have an enablement or "best mode" problem, but then I'm no patent attorney.)
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
