Transkaryotic Therapies (TKTX) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Transkaryotic Therapies (TKTX)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: paradigm7241 who wrote ()	4/21/2000 9:55:00 PM
From: paradigm7241	of 12

The post by sjhurst at Fool.com is an intellegent opinion on the case although it would certainly appear from the text that the author has a clear agenda. He brings up an important statement in Amgen's patent, that is protection of "non-human DNA sequences which control transcription". In it's most general sense if the judge upholds all the use of all non human promoter regions upstream of Epo, then TKT is cooked. From my understanding TKT was going after Amgen's use of the word "exogenous" (i.e transgenic) Epo as opposed to "endogenous" or "native" Epo produced by TKT. Amgen did not protect the production of endogenous human Epo and if TKT can convince the court that insertion of a promoter to augment endogenous Epo does not result in the production of "recombinant" Epo then TKT wins. In a sense, TKT is probably best off forcing the judge to define "recombinant". I am no lawyer and hence it is quite possible that sjhurst's legal opinion is correct. I am a scientist and my opinion after reading Amgen's patent on Epo is that TKT's process was not protected against. If it's true that you don't have to protect against any and all possiblities then, in my opinion, Amgen will win. PM

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next