% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Idenix Pharmaceuticals, AŞ Message Board

  • littlecatguy Mar 22, 2013 4:47 PM Flag

    Idenix Junior Party decision by USPTO

    A weak patent interference claim by Idenix against Gilead suffers a serious setback. Further adverse decisions in the interference could end up backfiring against IDIX, their uridine nucs might be at risk of having to pay royalties to Gilead. How ironic.
    This claim smelled rotten since day 1, its timing in the midst of difficult times in 2012 was just a smoke screen.
    Wonder where the pumpers are now? Guess half of their bullish thesis is in the dumper, and the other half are just pipe dreams.

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • CAMBRIDGE, Mass., March 22, 2013 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Idenix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Nasdaq:IDIX), a biopharmaceutical
      company engaged in the discovery and development of drugs for the treatment of human viral diseases, today announced that
      the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (USPTO) issued a decision in the first phase of
      the ongoing interference concerning one of the Company's patent applications (U.S. Patent Application 12/131,868) and an
      issued patent ( U.S. Patent 7,429,572) owned by Gilead Pharmasset LLC ("Gilead") that covers certain 2'-methyl- 2'-fluoro
      nucleoside compounds useful in the treatment of the hepatitis C virus.
      An interference is an adversarial proceeding declared by the USPTO when a party has a U.S. patent application that covers
      the same invention as another patent application or issued patent to determine priority of invention in the United States. An
      interference proceeding is divided into two stages. The first phase determines the application filing dates each party will have
      benefit of for the interfering subject matter. The party with the benefit of the earliest application filing date is deemed the 'senior
      party' and the party with the later date is deemed the 'junior party'. The second phase determines who was first to invent. The
      party who is deemed first to invent prevails in the interference proceeding.
      Today the USPTO issued a decision whereby Idenix was determined to have a later application filing date than Gilead.
      Therefore Idenix was determined to be the 'junior party' and Gilead the 'senior party' in the interference. The second phase of
      the interference is expected to commence in the second quarter of 2013 and, as noted above, will determine which party was
      first to invent. The decision that Idenix is the junior party does not determine which party will be deemed first to invent and
      ultimately prevail in the interference.
      Idenix does not believe that the patent application at issue in the i

      • 1 Reply to biotechbeagle
      • I agree that it might be an initial set-back to be determined as a junior party to the patent. However, please note that "The decision that Idenix is the junior party does not determine which party will be deemed first to invent and ultimately prevail in the interference" statement in the press release.
        Based upon the filing dates anybody can conclude who is first to file- and who is latter- but what really matters is the infringement of patent claims! Since the filing dates were obvious, Idenix would not have gone to the extent of litigation- just based upo that fact. There seems to be some strength to Idenix's claim. I am cautiously optimistic about the scenario. Dont give up hope.

24.500.00(0.00%)Aug 5 4:00 PMEDT