I would like to start this discussion to make an informed analysis on the final legal outcome of Copaxone trial, although by all accounts it may still be 6 months to a year away.
Please post ONLY if you have real insight. I would like to start this off, by posting a treasure "trove" I found on the internet
1. MNTA's motion for summary judgement on indefiniteness
2. Judge jones denial of that motion
3. Dec 2010 Goldman analyst's analysis on Copaxone suit
4. Wedbush's comments
By reading all of this, it appears the trial would hinge on the "inequitable conduct" just like lovenox trial and it appears burden rests on Plaintiff(MNTA) to prove that TEVA conduct was intentional
Anway guys, keep posting useful info to this thread and hopefully in a month we'll benefit from this thread and make a ton of money in the long term !
starts at 52 mins...worth listening
see MYLAN ceo's comments
analyst report after day 1 extremely irresponsible position to take
this judge is one of the most thorough judges
this attentive, engaged, this involved, very precise
she has not showing her hand one way or other
those who did not come after 48 hours
missed most important aspect of the ic trial
esp closing arguments
depositions of other people , opposite of what dr. piccasi testified
very strong arguments in front of judge
very confident of the case, we are aware of standards
for inequitable conduct
was a blessing to have inequitable conduct first
"An issue that will certainly rise is to what extent data was cherry picked for patent prosecution, and to what extent it skewed the USPTO review. For example, apparently only 4 COP-1 batches were discussed in the patent application yet there must have been >50 batches with reams of data at the time. "
Very interesting there were depositions oppostite to what Dr. Pinchasi testified for people working with her....That may discredit her testimony esp patent invalidity case (obviousness)..her testimony
"We believe Dr. Pinchasi was very strong on cross-X, consistently maintaining she had
a passive role in data selection for the patent application itself, defending her non-IP-driven
finding of MW-toxicity correlation, and generally not yielding on vague or leading questions"
But the cherry picking data and non disclosure bodes well to prove inequitable conduct...lets see
<< Will the Mcopax play out? I am betting with Dew. >> You don't need to take Dew's word on whether Mcopax is going to play out, you just need to look at Teva's actions over the past couple of months to realize its a for gone conclusion. The only question is when.
Frankly, I don't know. I have only "followed" his information on scientific stocks. His information on the coated stent market was very accurate and helped me to a triple on SRDX. I have no other sources that I trust for this information. MNTA said they could copy Lovenox and Dew said the science is there. Will the Mcopax play out? I am betting with Dew.
Some of us have watched Dew for over 10 years. His analysis of the scientific end of several stocks has been exceptional. Ihub is essential as Yahoo can be poluted very easily by clowns and shorties.
in addition getting a product like Fondaparinux approved as a generic would not grow the anti coagulant market as whole like enoxparin could because it just simply isn't used. You forget that although $350 million seems like a lot the potential billions of dollars in generic heparin is additional potential for enoxaparin vs just cannibalizing the branded Lovenox. Fonda will never get heparin business.
"vastly superior board:"
you must be kidding, right ? That is board where only long sentiments are permitted...That board IMO is living in a bubble.
They talk endlessly on immaterial items ...the only condition is your sentiment better be on the long side
There are numerous examples
1. How when it goes to $20, 10 people will post that it is heading towards $23. And when it comes to $19, how it is all manipulative game played by MM's
2. How they absolutely know 200% that TEVA will never ever be able to get to launch Lovenox..not even in 2012
3. How the sales would be 260m or 280m...really would this change the valuation to $30?
How Copaxone inequitable conduct has little chance of winning after 1st day's testimony, when nobody understands that the heart of the case(which is not disclosing prior art) was not even talked about in that testimony from that woman researcher from TEVA...
However none of them are interested in any transparency on FOB front be it spend or pipeline progress.
I do give them credit for posting links to court documents
when i exposed the company's FOB progress from 2004-2010 it didnt go well with some members!
takes on importance since it is starting July 11
Today starts the trial . I continue to believe TEVA has a strong case for both the "but for" standard for proving materiality as well as intent to deceive
here is the 1st inequitable conduct case after the recent therasense opinion