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

Sequenom Inc. Message Board

  • individuaione individuaione Apr 25, 2013 5:16 PM Flag

    Lay of the Land for the CC

    I think HH has to break with tradition and ultra safe practices and address a key aspect of what is happening to SEQ--- on the legal landscape. Many investors believed in SEQ's IP foundation.

    So where are we at:

    1. Around the world...where are we patent protected, patent legally tested and where are we NOT.

    2. SQNM vs. ILMN... this is the pivot point discussion and it deserves to be addressed...we feel we have distinct IP advantages in the #540 patent so how do they stack up against what we know that ILMN has? The common word was, SEQ was first, there fore we win. But obviously JFlatley has some other card to play...what could those cards be...?

    3. Obviously #2 leads to a discussion based on what Jay Flatly has proposed to "ILMN's clients" ( I would guess natera and ariosa are also clients, along with SEQ).

    Why not clear the air...if we intend to go all the way thru the courts via appeals etc, then lets put that on the table right now,of course based on the particulars in each ruling.

    4. What date is HH goal for NIPT side of things being profitable, then the entire company being profitable.

    5. Lets take a short stroll into the future...ILMN is partnered with PE, Ariosa with Lab corp., Natera with who cares...does SEQ. have what it takes to continue as a solo act or are we considering partnering?

    6. You can see alot of big players lining up in the category with SEQ. being a solo player...can we continue down that road?

    I am sure other investors have questions also while many CCs are just slapping wallpaper over a pink elephant. Lets get real and reveal what is going on now and what we see in the near future.

    Sentiment: Strong Buy

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • I believe the entire future of this company relies on the court verdict, because if we lose there, the other test providers will continue to erode our market share do to their aliances.

      I just don't fully understand how a patent is granted and for years during development and hugh expenditure to bring a product to market provides all kinds of protection, but then when approaching the actual launch the patent is all of a sudden questionable. I guess if the process/procedure (test) didn't work so well it wouldn't matter. To a layman it seems easy for a judge to just look at the timeline and patent filing and go our way, but judges have their ego to deal with and want to be looked upon as sages.In Ariosa's case it will put them out of business, but they are in business only because they stole SQNM's IP. They shouldn't have been allowed to get into business in the first place. JMHO

      • 1 Reply to wtd1776
      • to add little twist here. The 540 patent is indeed weak. That might be the reason why the injunction failed so far. However, Lo also filed a sequencing based patent which was already allowed before Dec 25th and then withdrawn by the PTO. This Lo patent is substantially equivalent to the Quake patent. Remember, in late 2008 Quake and Lo publish their enabling studies within a few weeks in PNAS. So the question is now who has the earlier priority date. Stanford TTO did obviously a great job to push this as quickly as possible through the USPTO but that doesn't mean it has a better priority date. Sequenom prosecuting the Lo application was slow. Perhaps that is the reason why HH brought in a new General Counsel and demoted Clarke Newman. So in fact, if Lo put down the idea earlier it may lead to the invalidation of the Quake patent.

    • Jay Flatley knows that if Sequenom wins the 540 patent Verinata is in trouble. Winning the patent and court case gives two things to Sequenom. First the patent expiration would be moved out farther as a result of the patent interference case win. Second the court win would not require Sequenom to issue licenses to competitors, as Sequenom would be known as a monopolist. So if you don't think Jay Flatley doesn't want to resolve this situation your wrong. Even Dr. Diane Bianchi of Tuft's University discussed prenatal diagonostics and how it would be effected if Sequenom won. The points I just stated were exactly what she said. The only question here is whether Harry Hixson wants to deal or go all the way. Your guess is as good as mine. I don't know. If I was a betting man I'm going to say Harry is going to go all the way. We will see!

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • 2 Replies to prudenttrader7
      • I am betting HH is going all the way with the cards he holds and has a good hand here. We all should know very the meantime stay patient. Regards, The King Of Patience

      • Jay has already stated the he believes Quake/ILMN has the upper hand in the IP battle. So the crux of what I am saying, what could he possibly have in his possession to make him believe that. Any CEO has to consider all the angles to any fight that is likely to cost the company 50-75M$ and potentially ruin the company.

        So yeah, the court this and the court that...that's down the road. What the hell is out there now...HH reviewed this at length with K/S, if we are basing things on a hope and prayer, then we deserve to know.

        Look I don't believe a thing Flatly says, but he just bet $450M on what he has vs. a protracted legal fight with a client ( SEQ) and a legal fight with a partner ( SEQ's IVD FDA sub. based on ILMN's platform).

        Just because Flatly says something, does not make it true. However, I want to know what is known by SEQ. How strong of a position do we have...yeah yeah I know, LO was first. So how will Quake/ILMN upend that fact?

        So are we attacking Quake's patents? If NOT, why not?


        Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • 1. Europe I believe had 1 case. I don't think there is any secrecy there. The courts are slow, TUFF!
      2. Guessing. Go asked Flatulently his vision is to make himself money at everyone else expense.
      3.Courts. As always just guessing no one can predict the courts. What rulings, there hasn't been any...
      5.Solo act why change? Partners have to be PAID from profits.
      6. Yes. No secret there.
      6b. More guessing.

      The problem with guessing is: They GUESSED that they would sign 2 providers last year and what happened?
      Just like a bunch of disappointed screaming little children.
      You will know what happens when it happens and are not owed any guesses of when because it is not something that can be predicted with any accuracy.
      Have faith OR sell and don't look back.
      It's a speculative stock, you want stability buy GE...
      JMHAO no offense...

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • I would be very pleasantly surprised if we get a true lay of the land. I expect we get the numbers and BS on how things are going better than expected but no clarity or guidance, too bad.

    • At this point i don't mind giving one of the big boys a piece of the pie ... i don't think we should continue solo with all the giants lining up against us.

1.28-0.06(-4.48%)Apr 29 4:00 PMEDT