I AGREE!!! This is worth HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, EVEN BILLIONS. Why would anyone settle for less, far less. And simply letting someone get by with patent infringement for a small sum. This suit will say much about MNTA technology. This is NOT analogous to the TEVA suit by any measure. Amphastar has FDA approval. The stakes are huge. [I can't help but believe that MNTA was blindsided, which is inexcusable.]
The couple of percent deals tend to be settlements. The injunctions are always from successful lawsuits. I'm guessing that any potential infringement is ambiguous enough so that both sides decide to settle. But really this is no more than a wild guess - I have no idea what processes Amphastar (or Teva) use (and neither does MNTA).
One issue for MNTA here is timing - could be that the Amphastar process predates the MNTA patents.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
