Steve:
There was a second trial. The jury was not allowed, however, to rule on guilt.
I don't think that we're on opposite sides of the fence. I really wish that the companies could have worked something out. However, I do feel that CPRO is infringing the B-D/Johns Hopkins patents. And, certainly, you're correct; there is a chance that CPRO will prevail.
You are required to reduce an invention to practice to get the patent. You are not required to commercialize anything in order for it to remain in force. I believe that CPRO had the license offered to them.
When I went to industry, I started out with a Baxter competitor. I watched them then, and I've watched them since. I even had some up close and personal when I was collaborating with the old BioTherapeutics. They (Baxter Immunotherapy) always seem to try to re-engineer something to suit a new purpose, rather than take the straight route as CPRO did. So..... I don't know if their impotence is due to a lack of diligence or just the obvious. That is, sitting on their butts or working their butts off, it's hard to tell the difference with Baxter.
I've never looked at the CPRO arguments. I only know that, when I looked at the CD34 patent while I was at a reagents company, I came to the opinion that we should license the work. Since I have not looked at the CPRO argument, one should take my commentary with the old grain of salt.
Peter..... here's an excerpt from the last SyStemix 10-Q, issued before (11/8/96) Sandoz (Novartis) purchased them. I would need to know the current status of these competitive efforts and others, as well as review the other VMRX projects, before I could say that VMRX is a serious consideration. That said, I bought a few shares on Thursday. I do this on occasion..... buy a little bit so that I am forced to learn more. The excerpt..........
Many existing cancer therapies, such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy,
compromise the body's immune system and its ability to create new cells.
By reinfusing HSCs after these therapies, the Company believes that
patients will achieve timely recovery as well as sustained hematopoietic
function over the long term. The Company believes that in addition to the
importance of its patented cell population, a key competitive advantage for
the Company is its proprietary high speed cell sorting system that
separates viable and functional HSCs at higher speeds and levels of purity
than cell doses obtained with a number of other cell separation methods.
By using this system to achieve a highly pure dose of HSCs, the Company is
able to effectively eliminate certain types of tumor cells, providing a
cell population that is disease-free to the levels detectable by the most
sensitive methods currently available.
*********************
and here's a description of the VMRX deal from the Baxter perspective (from the latest 10-K)......
VIMRX Pharmaceuticals Inc.
In December 1997, the company and VIMRX Pharmaceuticals Inc. (VIMRX) formed a
new cell-therapy company to develop innovative treatments for cancer and other
life-threatening diseases. The company transferred certain assets of its
Immunotherapy division into the new company and holds a minority ownership
position along with warrants to acquire an additional ownership interest in the
future. VIMRX obtained a majority interest in the new company in exchange for 11
million shares of VIMRX common stock and convertible preferred shares with a
nominal value of approximately $66 million. The securities received by Baxter
are reflected on the company's balance sheet in other noncurrent assets. Baxter
is restricted from selling the common stock or converting the convertible
preferred stock for a period of time pursuant to government regulations and
contractual agreement, respectively. The company recognized a pretax gain from
the transaction of $32 million. The company and VIMRX loaned $30 million and $10
million, respectively, to the new company to provide initial operating funds.
*************
I hope nobody is laboring under the impression that I have looked thoroughly at either VMRX or CPRO. I haven't.
Rick |
