Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Xenogen (XGEN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rkrw who wrote (12)	4/12/2005 5:02:12 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45

Yeah, trying to decide if it's cheap yet. Here's AntiCancer's patent portfolio: anticancer.com At first glance, it would appear that the issue is the animal models, no the imaging technology. Will have to dig deeper. Edit: Second glance, nope it's the imaging, too. anticancer.com Rather different machines, but similar principles, indeed. AntiCancer uses GFP instead of luciferase. Cheers, Tuck

To: rkrw who wrote (12)	5/10/2005 4:23:03 PM
From: tuck	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45

>>ALAMEDA, Calif., May 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Xenogen Corporation (Nasdaq: XGEN - News), maker of advanced imaging systems including instruments, biological solutions and software to accelerate drug discovery and development, today announced that it filed with the court its answer to a patent infringement complaint filed by AntiCancer Inc. Concurrent with filing its answer, Xenogen filed counterclaims against AntiCancer claiming that AntiCancer infringes two Xenogen patents. On March 7, 2005, AntiCancer filed a lawsuit against Xenogen in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California alleging infringement of five patents of AntiCancer relating to fluorescence-based imaging. The complaint does not specify the factual basis of the allegedly infringing conduct. The complaint seeks damages and injunctive relief against the alleged infringement. On March 29, 2005, AntiCancer amended its complaint to include an additional claim seeking a judgment that one of Xenogen's imaging patents, 5,650,135, is invalid. On May 10, 2005, Xenogen filed its answer to AntiCancer's amended complaint. Xenogen denied all of AntiCancer's allegations and asserted various affirmative defenses, including its position that AntiCancer's patents, including some of the patents cited in its complaint, and patent claims relating to in vivo imaging of fluorescence, are invalid. Xenogen is vigorously defending itself against AntiCancer's claims and believes AntiCancer's complaint is without merit Concurrent with filing its answer to AntiCancer's complaint, Xenogen filed its own counterclaims against AntiCancer. Xenogen's counterclaims allege that AntiCancer infringes two of Xenogen's U.S. patents, 5,650,135 and 6,649,143, both relating to in vivo imaging and with a priority date before AntiCancer's patents cited in its amended complaint. Xenogen intends to vigorously pursue its claims against AntiCancer. Xenogen and AntiCancer are also involved in litigation that commenced in 2001. In that lawsuit, AntiCancer alleges the following five causes of action against Xenogen: trade libel, defamation, intentional interference with contract, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage and unfair competition. A September 2005 trial has been scheduled for this lawsuit. Xenogen believes the complaint is without merit and it is mounting a vigorous defense. These lawsuits may be expensive, take significant time and may divert Xenogen management's attention from other business concerns. The patent infringement lawsuits will put certain of Xenogen's patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly. Additionally, Xenogen may suffer reduced instrumentation sales and/or license revenue as a result of the pending lawsuits or following final resolution of the lawsuits. Xenogen may not successfully defend itself against AntiCancer's claims, and could have monetary damages or other remedies levied against it that could adversely impact Xenogen's financial position or operations. Xenogen may not prevail in its patent infringement counterclaims against AntiCancer and any damage or other remedies awarded to Xenogen, if any, may not be commercially valuable. During the course of the lawsuits, there may be public announcements of results of hearings, motions and other interim proceedings or developments in the litigations. If securities analysts or others perceive any of these results to be negative, it could cause our stock price to decline.<< This being the first announcement outside of an 8-K, the market punished XGEN and sent it to all time lows today. But as this release -- admittedly biased -- points out, XGEN's IP at issue has priority dates prior to those of AntiCancer's. I think they'll either win outright or settle, possibly with some minor cross-licensing agreement. Cheers, Tuck