|
Post by BD on Dec 7, 2023 19:44:17 GMT -5
Arghh, this is getting too hypothetical. MNKD is not a family member of mine, more like a long-time acquaintance. I'm still rooting for MNKD, just not putting any more money into it than I've already lost... You only lost if you sold at a loss. MTOI says shares are still cheap so up to you if you want to get in on the "fun" (where I can't write "fun" without wincing a little). No, we're talking ancient history now, went way too heavy into calls around Sanofi time, then at right about the time I would probably have reevaluated and unloaded a bunch of those calls, I got hit with pulmonary emboli (I survived lol) and I ended up letting those ride into oblivion. I definitely lost.
|
|
|
Post by prcgorman2 on Dec 7, 2023 19:56:29 GMT -5
Oy. Sorry to hear that BD (about the calls, but very glad you surivived the pulmonary embolisms). Based on the flat quarters, you have plenty of time for modest accumulation of “cheap shares” if you want. (Which is not something I enjoyed suggesting.)
|
|
|
Post by BD on Dec 7, 2023 20:05:08 GMT -5
Well, prc, if my other investments get their a$$es in gear within that time frame of yours, I may very well do that. God help me.
|
|
|
Post by cppoly on Dec 10, 2023 10:53:08 GMT -5
Just listened to the December 4th UTHR vs LQDA hearing again. UTHR has some really good arguments, and the fact that they just need one to stick is raising the odds for UTHR for me. Hoping for a good outcome.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 12, 2023 6:29:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by cppoly on Dec 12, 2023 10:24:29 GMT -5
Aged, thanks for this.
Putting the LQDA bias aside, it was still a mostly objective commentary. I would like to highlight that even with this bias comes an admission that there is a concern that LQDA introduced new material / arguments about the abstracts on the Dec 4th hearing.
Because of this, it seems more likely that this will be sent back for PTAB to review again.
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Dec 20, 2023 15:10:52 GMT -5
I was debating which thread to post in, and since this contains the most on the Federal Circuit appeal I opted for this on... The opinion was written by Judge Lourie. cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/23-1805.OPINION.12-20-2023_2241699.pdfThe whole of the case turned on the prior art argument and reading through the opinion from the court was an interesting exercise. The new material argument (was the prior art material even admissible) was turned down. All that was required was that the board didn't abuse their discretion in accepting the material, which the court found they hadn't because it was introduced in respond to new arguments made in a patent owner response. The next point was the interesting one; that the prior art material hadn't reached the level of public distribution. This was the key argument because if UTHR won it for either the JESC, and JAHA or abstract books then the previous admissibility point was irrelevant. Remember Reyna was asking why LQDA couldn't even produce one person to say they had received it. The LQDA lawyer pointed out at the hearing that they were not obliged to (which is true). The opinion pretty much took that line and ran with it listing the ways which the UTHR had got this wrong (pages 8 and 9 for those who want entertainment). On the obviousness argument the court seems to have taken the view that not even UTHR believed this ("This argument, only a single paragraph in UTC’s opening brief, borders on waiver.") The final point, dosing had two problems; UTHR hadn't raised it before the PTAB and so was forfeit, and that even if it had been permitted it would have failed the obviousness test. At the point this was originally argued before the PTAB UTHR had relying on the prior art argument failing and this came back to haunt them as the allowed the LQDA expert's testimony that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in arriving at the claimed dry powder formulation based on the combined teachings of the ’212 patent, JESC, and JAHA. If either of JESC or JAHA had not been accepted as prior art that strategy would have worked.
|
|
|
Post by harryx1 on Dec 23, 2023 16:05:07 GMT -5
Well, one LQDA investor has seen the light... don't agree with some of the numbers but overall a somewhat fair assessment between products. The legal battle is over but the war wages on. The original writeup stipulated 3 scenarios and the third scenario played out almost to perfection. I'm surprised by the accuracy of the call, but it was a fairly obvious timeline and with easy to define base rates. I originall wrote the following in August and it played out well. I originally thought Liquidia could have dominated their market, but after further research, I’ve changed my opinion...
Read more here: adus.substack.com/p/following-up-on-liquidia
|
|
|
Post by Clement on Dec 24, 2023 9:37:13 GMT -5
Well, one LQDA investor has seen the light... don't agree with some of the numbers but overall a somewhat fair assessment between products. The legal battle is over but the war wages on. The original writeup stipulated 3 scenarios and the third scenario played out almost to perfection. I'm surprised by the accuracy of the call, but it was a fairly obvious timeline and with easy to define base rates. I originall wrote the following in August and it played out well. I originally thought Liquidia could have dominated their market, but after further research, I’ve changed my opinion...
Read more here: adus.substack.com/p/following-up-on-liquidia"Counterargument 3a By that same logic, Yutrepia hasn't been studies in PH ILD patients yet which puts it at a disadvantage. The clinical data, mechanism of action, and even the active molecule is the same In addition, real world evidence likely includes patients naïve to treprostinil starting Tyvaso DPI with no issues: " New patient starts are trending around a 70-30 split between DPI and the nebulizer, respectively" - United Therapeutics Earnings Call August 2nd." As I recall, significant new scripts of Tyvaso nebulizer for PH-ILD were due to insurance and Medicare coverage which has not happened yet for T-DPI. UTHR projected coverage in 2024 for T-DPI. Will Yutrepia have coverage for PH-ILD in 2024?
|
|
|
Post by neil36 on Jan 8, 2024 15:00:28 GMT -5
Significant portion of the UTHR presentation at JP Morgan (which just concluded) was spent focused on the advantages of the Tyvaso DPI low-flow delivery vs. Yutrepia's high-flow system.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jan 8, 2024 15:14:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by longliner on Jan 8, 2024 15:16:12 GMT -5
stkt.co/2kJZLujsSlides up! Our partner United Therapeutics highlights the advantages of our delivery platform.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jan 8, 2024 15:32:59 GMT -5
stkt.co/2kJZLujsSlides up. Our partner United Therapeutics highlights the advantages of our delivery platform. Holy. The deal was, UTHR in charge of sales. Add to that the rebates are in place. Health insurance coverage. I'll type this here. Rare diseases. It seems to me Mike C has moved towards specialty, Rare diseases. Is this because the medication can get health insurance coverage? Also, Binder and the balance sheet. UTHR runs a clean, clean balance sheet.
|
|
|
Post by hellodolly on Jan 8, 2024 15:51:16 GMT -5
As I suspected and mentioned, "patient satisfaction" with DPI turns out to be one of the three pillars to "Early, Easy, Effective". Yutopia can be marketed by LQDA, but they're going to need to convince doctors and patients why they should take a superior product away from a patient that's happy, satisfied with the current delivery device and responding to the med. Oh, I haven't even gone into the low flow v high flow differences covered in the slide deck.
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Jan 8, 2024 15:57:19 GMT -5
stkt.co/2kJZLujsSlides up. Our partner United Therapeutics highlights the advantages of our delivery platform. Holy. The deal was, UTHR in charge of sales. Add to that the rebates are in place. Health insurance coverage. I'll type this here. Rare diseases. It seems to me Mike C has moved towards specialty, Rare diseases. Is this because the medication can get health insurance coverage? Also, Binder and the balance sheet. UTHR runs a clean, clean balance sheet. Peppy - as things currently are, there is no way BP will ever allow afrezza to be what Al Mann envisioned. It will destroy a $100B industry. Unless Mike goes nuclear all he can do with diabetes is take the little scraps BP will allow MNKD to have. A new drug in a market BP does not care about does not poke the bear. Thats MNKD-101 - clofazimine on TS. Put Saxenda on TS without BP permission and watch the sparks fly. Go nuclear with afrezza and I have no idea what would happen.
|
|