Replies to post #114337 on Biotech Values

[DewDiligence]

Handicapping the Copaxone Patent Case

Based on the issuance of MNTA’s new patent, I’m updating my probability
that NVS/MNTA prevails in the Copaxone litigation on the non-infringement
argument from 30% to 55%. (I’m keeping the probabilities for prevailing on
each of the other three arguments unchanged because those arguments do
not depend in any way on MNTA’s technology.)

 
                    OLD probability    NEW probability 
                    NVS/MNTA prevails  NVS/MNTA prevails 
 Argument           on this argument   on this argument 
  
 Obviousness/ 
 double patenting         40%              40% 
  
 Non-infringement         30%              55% 
  
 Indefiniteness           10%              10% 
  
 Inequitable conduct       5%               5% 
 ===================      ===              === 
  
 Composite of  
 four arguments*          64%              77% 
  
  
 *Calculated by multiplying the probabilities  
 of each argument’s failing and subtracting 
 that product from 100%.

JMHO, FWIW

[pcrutch]

Do you still think that patent news is consequential to the litigation, in light of the comments below? This could just be posturing and trying not to give away any strategy. thanks

"Eric – Oppenheimer:
I just had one quick question for the glatiramer acetate patent you guys were awarded a couple of days ago, could that be used to provide validation that you don't infringe upon Teva’s patents?

Craig Wheeler
I don't really think it is designed to do that, it is really designed to actually control the manufacturing process so we can actually duplicate what Teva’s made, so that is really the intents of the patents. So I think – there might be some read-through on that but I don’t think that there are lot of read-through in that direction."

[investorgold2002]

"by supporting NVS/MNTA’s argument to the District Court that NVS/MNTA’s generic does not infringe Teva’s Copaxone patents in the Orange Book. "


MNTA's copaxone patent is for characterizing and assuring the quality of Copaxone.

The patent claim(s) in trial here is "Lower molecular weight Copolymer is less toxic" .

So if Momenta produces such a lower molecular weight product, it is likely they will infringe on TEVA's patent.

Now since two other studies contradicted the above claim, it would have been possible that the patent itself be deemed invalid...but for that I guess they have to go through "inequitable conduct"...hmmm