Replies to post #131843 on Biotech Values

[Double_Bagel]

Rockrat, thanks for your analysis. From the table of contents in the document, doesn't the inequitable conduct case seem to be rather strong for MNTA? This is pretty harsh stuff about Dr. Pinchasi. This is just from a cursory glance of the table of contents :-)


FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW RELATING TO
DEFENDANTS’ INEQUITABLE CONDUCT DEFENSE ......................... 222

...
...

(v) Dr. Pinchasi’s Intent to Deceive ....................................................... 260

(1) Dr. Pinchasi’s Lacked Credibility .................................................... 260

(2) Dr. Pinchasi’s Documents Do Not Establish Good Faith ..................... 262

(3) Dr. Pinchasi’s Motive to Lie to the PTO ............................................ 269

(4) Dr. Pinchasi Took Inconsistent Positions With the FDA and PTO ........ 273


C.Conclusions of Law ................................................................. 277

(i) The Materiality of the April 1994 Data Table and the RBL
Degranulation Information........................................................... 277

(ii) Dr. Pinchasi Had An Intent to Deceive the PTO ......................... 285

[DewDiligence]

Sandoz’s response to Paragraph 563 (page 224) regarding the Therasense exception is noteworthy, IMO.

[zipjet]

She seems to contradict herself and other documentary evidence, too. She is a key witness, and I don't find her very credible.

Agreed, Pinchasi is too facile with her words. (#603) It may help navigate Scilla (PTO) and Charybdis (FDA) but the judge will notice.

Sandoz response on Findings of Fact also presents an interesting view of the way the safe harbor is used: to duplicate Copaxone; and then we see a real life patent-work-around of the time-temperature reaction limiting step which is replaced with the use of an embedded viscosity measurement to limit the reaction.

ij