It is obviously true that if a smaller company, one like say. . . Idenix, had agreed independently to a say one percent royalty, it would be hard for Merck to argue, with a straight face, that 10 per cent would be a "fair market" royalty demand. Now that impediment has been removed, as of the closing of the Idenix tender offer, this morning. [My earler 2014 backgrounder here.]
So -- these are the latest Northern California (San Jose) federal District Court's scheduling order dates -- entered yesterday -- should this matter go forward. Me(?), I predict a. . . settlement -- at what royalty rate? Who knows? But Christmas 2015 could prove rather interesting, if there is no settlement -- on this perhaps $13 billion a year drug, by then. Here you go:
. . . .Summary Judgment Motions Filed | October 29, 2015
Oppositions to Summary Judgment Motions Filed | November 12, 2015
Replies in Further Support of Summary Judgment Motions Filed | November 19, 2015
Hearing on Summary Judgment Motions | December 10, 2015. . . .
We will keep you posted, if it hasn't settled by Thanksgiving, a year from now.
No comments:
Post a Comment