Why, given that PerClot doesn’t have a U.S. patent, and in view of the recent Medafor effort to shore up their Arista patent, it is likely that CRY will ever be able to generate profitable PerClot sales in the U.S.?
Be specific as to why CRY thinks Medafor’s patent will not be determined to be valid.
Be specific as to what sort of legal patent opinion CRY obtained prior to making its PerClot licensing agreement investment.
Note: To date CRY has invested approximately $10 million in PerClot (distribution license, manufacturing license, and other related costs). In addition, CRY will be incurring substantial future costs related to obtaining U.S. FDA approval. Hence, this is a legitimate question.