And — In “Equal Time Dept.” — Merck’s Idenix V. Gilead Post Trial Brief (Redacted)

mrk-alt-gil-verdict-hep-c-12-15-16 At 92 pages, it is a monster of a PDF.

And it is redacted — as was Gilead‘s. But here’s a bit:

. . . .Georgia-Pacific factor 5 (the commercial relationship between the licensor and licensee, such as, whether they are competitors in the same territory in the same line of business) supports an upward adjustment to the jury’s 10% rate. At the time of the hypothetical negotiation in 2013, Idenix did not have a product on the market that competed with Gilead’s Sovaldi® and Harvoni®, and Idenix was not affiliated with any other companies.

But as of January 2017, Idenix had become a subsidiary of Merck, which was selling (and continues to sell) Zepatier®, a product that directly competes with Sovaldi® and Harvoni®. (Id. at ¶¶ 30-36.) Thus, granting a license to Gilead would result in immediate lost sales and/or market share of Merck’s competing product. (Id. at ¶ 30.) This factor supports a royalty rate substantially higher than 10%. Indeed, the rate proposed by Idenix is conservative as it would not come close to recouping the potential losses to Merck’s product. . . .

We shall see. I expect this will be reduced, not enhanced — or it will settle on confidential terms. Onward, to a solid Saturday workout. Smile.

नमस्ते

Advertisements

There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: