is anyone interested?, page-3

Is anyone interested in which individual in the company planted the seed to go down the path of suing Mylan for inherited apparent patent infringements involving the daptomycin injectable product?

The way I see it, “going down the arbitration path” wasn’t the result of one individual’s idea; it was the inevitable path, dictated by contract.

It seems to me that, by late 2015, Phosphagenics had serious problems to resolve with Mylan (at a minimum, the disputed patent as well as no word on development progress) and Mylan would have been made aware of this but was refusing to talk, probably on legal advice.

The TPM®/Daptomycin licencing agreement signed in 2012 forms part of the arbitration dispute with Mylan. To date Mylan has not launched the TPM®/Daptomycin product and Phosphagenics has not been informed by Mylan of either its registration or launch plans. Therefore Phosphagenics is not aware of when it might begin to receive royalty payments it is entitled to under the licencing agreement. (2016 Annual Report)

Thus Mylan played the ball into POH’s court. Ultimately, the decision to refer the disputes to arbitration in Singapore was dictated by the provisions of the 2011 R &D Agreement and the 2012 Licensing Agreement which POH and Agila Strides signed. This was also explained in the 2016 Annual Report

In January 2016, Phosphagenics lodged a dispute notice in association with the Agila TPM®/Daptomycin agreements. In accordance with the relevant agreements, the dispute was referred to arbitration in Singapore.