Replies to post #123113 on Biotech Values

[Regulardoc]

Sorry for such a stupid question, but noticed it is TEVA's suit, so clearly they go first. Other questions still in play.

Thanks.

[DewDiligence]

Comments on the Copaxone litigation from MYL’s 2Q11 CC:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/282387-mylan-s-ceo-discusses-q2-2011-results-earnings-call-transcript

John Boris (Citigroup): The outcome from the inequitable conduct trial, how would you characterize the outcome there? …how do you think that shapes the Judge’s opinion going forward as you go into the non-infringement and invalidity arguments?

Robert Coury (CEO): Well, I think that's a loaded question for me, John, as you probably know. Because when I've seen some of the analyst reports, especially some of the reports that came out and said, well, we're not even going to show up after day 2 because this is all but done. I just think once again, it's an extremely irresponsible position [for the sell-side analysts] to take.

I think that this Judge…is one of the most thorough judges I have ever seen in the 10 years I've been in this role. I have never seen a judge this attentive, this engaged, this involved, very precise. I don't think she's showing her hand one way or the other. I can only observe by the type of questions that are being asked where her interest lies. And those who didn't enter the courtroom or did not want to come in after the first 48 hours probably missed the most important aspect of the inequitable conduct trial. That was during the closing arguments when the depositions were entered from other people that were in the room with Dr. Pinchasi who stated completely the opposite of what she testified to.

…we are very well aware of the threshold and the hurdles in the standards now in the inequitable conduct case. But I have to tell you, we have very, very thoroughly done our diligence, and I think we laid out a very strong, straightforward case to the judge. And I think the Judge got a lot to think about. In terms of what we gained by having the inequitable conduct trial first…I'd call it a blessing. It was Teva that chose to have this trial separated and to have the inequitable conduct trial first. Tactically, I'm not sure I would have done that that way, but I can tell you that we gained a significant amount in terms of being able to have that trial first and only added to the strength, I believe, we already had going into the invalidity trial and the non-infringement trial in September. So I'm very, very confident, I'm extremely excited about where we stand there, and that's all I have to say for now.