News Focus
News Focus
icon url

DewDiligence

10/10/11 12:39 AM

#128120 RE: biomaven0 #128118

Really by analogy with formulation patents.

I don’t understand that logic at all. Formulation patents and manufacturing-process patents are very different animals.
icon url

DewDiligence

10/11/11 12:11 PM

#128232 RE: biomaven0 #128118

Re: Formulation patents vs process patents

Following up on the comments in #msg-67827759, I revisited a few cases of generic-drug litigation pertaining to formulation patents. In general, these cases boil down to something as mundane as whether the salt form employed by the defendant is covered by the broad language in the plaintiff’s patent.

That’s a far cry from the complex issues inherent in MNTA’s process patents for Lovenox (and most other manufacturing-process patents). Thus, I continue to find the rationale behind your prediction of a single-digit royalty in the Lovenox case (#msg-67824288) to be misguided. Regards, Dew