Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)

Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ:MNTA)

Q4 2009 Earnings Call Transcript

February 11, 2010 10:00 am ET

Executives

Beverly Holley - Director, IR

Craig Wheeler - President and CEO

Rick Shea - SVP and CFO

Analysts

Joseph Schwartz - Leerink

Simos Simeonidis - Rodman & Renshaw

Bret Holley – Oppenheimer

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Ziad Bakri - Cowen

Ronny Gal - Bernstein

Operator

Please stand by, we are about to begin. Good day, and welcome to the Momenta Pharmaceuticals fourth quarter 2009 earnings conference call. As a reminder, today’s call is being recorded.

At this time for opening remarks and introduction, I would now like to turn the conference over to Beverly Holley, Director of IR. Please go ahead.

Beverly Holley

Thank you, and good morning. I want to welcome all of you to Momenta’s conference call to discuss financial results for the fourth quarter and full year 2009, and provide a corporate update.

With me on the call today with prepared remarks are Craig Wheeler, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Rick Shea, Chief Financial Officer. Also with us on the call is Jim Roach, Chief Medical Officer. Following our remarks, we’ll open the call to questions.

Before we begin, I’d like to mention that our call today will contain forward-looking statements. Various remarks that Momenta Pharmaceuticals may make about management’s future expectations, beliefs, intentions, goals, strategies, plans or prospects, including statements relating to the FDA’s review and inquiries regarding generic Lovenox regulatory submissions, our product development plans, and the company's revenue, expenses and other results of operations, including the quarter and year ended December 31, 2009, current and future development efforts and commercialization efforts, may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

Forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as "anticipate," "believe," "could," "could increase the likelihood," "hope," "target," "project," "goals," "potential," "predict," "might," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "is planned," "may," "should," "will," "will enable," "would be expected," "look forward," "may provide," "would" or similar terms, variations of such terms or the negative of those terms. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors referred to in the company's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the section "Risk Factors," as well as other documents that may be filed by Momenta from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

As a result of such risks, uncertainties and factors, the company's actual results may differ materially from any future results, performance or achievements discussed in or implied by the forward-looking statements contained herein. Momenta is providing the information in this press release as of this date and assumes no obligations to update the information included in this press release or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Our logo, trademarks, and service marks are the property of Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. All other trade names, trademarks, or service marks are property of their respective owners.

With that, I will now turn this call over to Craig Wheeler, Momenta’s President and Chief Executive Officer.

Craig Wheeler

Thank you, Beverly. Good morning everyone, and thank you for joining us. I hope everybody has got their driveway shoveled by now.

This morning I will discuss our company’s progress against its 2009 goals, provide an update on recent corporate developments at Momenta, and provide an overview of our plans and goals for the company for 2010. Finally, Rick will give an overview of our 2009 financials and provide financial guidance for 2010.

2009 was a year of hard work and considerable accomplishments for our company. I am very proud of the company for continuing to advance all of our programs in the face of a very thorough and extensive FDA review of the M-Enoxaparin ANDA. I will briefly recap our accomplishments.

Our first goal for 2009 was to receive regulatory approval for M-Enoxaparin and to launch the product. This goal was not achieved but we made significant progress in removing the remaining barriers to approval during the year.

Our second goal for 2009 was to substantially advance the regulatory review of M356, and complete the product and process development activities required to support the approval and commercialization of the product. We are pleased with the progress made on 356 until our application is on track.

Our third goal for 2009 was to complete the M118 Phase II clinical study, submit the results for presentation at an appropriate medical meeting, and to advance discussions with suitable collaborative partners in order to further progress the M118 development program. The (inaudible) was completely scheduled with positive results and we are now working to find a partner for M118.

Our fourth major goal for 2009 was to advance our Follow-on Biologics program with the ultimate intent of building a leading competitive position in substitutable biogeneric products. We are pleased with the technical progress we have made during the year and are hoping we will have a stable legislation to open a regulatory pathway during the coming year.

Though we were disappointed that we did not gain our long sought Enoxaparin approval during the year, I can state with confidence that our scientific platform has advanced, and now provides an even stronger scientific base on which to build our novel, complex, generic, and biologic programs.

I will now discuss the current status of each of our programs starting with M-Enoxaparin. The M-Enoxaparin ANDA continues to be under review by the FDA. We believe that our methods for thorough characterization have enabled us to produce a product that meets the FDA’s approval requirements for therapeutic equivalence. In addition, we believe our technology has addressed the issue raised by the Citizen’s Petition. We remain confident in the approvability of the application and believe the FDA has all the major elements it needs to approve the ANDA to resolve the Citizen’s Petition. As always there is uncertainty, but we believe this will be a pivotal year for Momenta with the product removed from development stage to commercialization.

We have recently received a lot of questions about the payment terms of our collaboration with Sandoz for sales of M-Enoxaparin in the United States. I would like to take a few minutes now to summarize the terms that we previously disclosed. Under our 2003 collaboration with Sandoz, if M-Enoxaparin is the only interchangeable generic Lovenox on the market, we receive a profit share. We have disclosed the profit percentages between 40% and 50%. If another interchangeable generic Lovenox is on the market, we receive a royalty on net sales by Sandoz. We have disclosed that the royalty rates range form high single to low double digits. If the only competitor to M-Enoxaparin is an authorized generic, we received (inaudible) and royalty up to a specified sales level, then a profit share on net sales above the sales cut off.

We have also previously disclosed that the 2003 collaboration with Sandoz has cost sharing provisions. Under the collaboration, Sandoz has paid substantially all of the M-Enoxaparin development and commercial costs. Under the cost sharing provisions upon launch of the product, Momenta will repay to Sandoz a portion of the development costs above a specified threshold. Momenta’s cost sharing percentage will be lower if we are receiving a royalty payment and higher if we are receiving a profit share. This repayment will come as a deduction from the profit share or royalty otherwise due to Momenta and will reduce our revenue in the initial quarters after launch. However the development cost sharing reduction cannot exceed 50% of the profit share of royalty payments due for a given quarter.

So to summarize M-Enoxaparin, a decision from the FDA could come at any time, and while approval of the M-Enoxaparin ANDA cannot be assured, we do believe we are well positioned for a positive action. Should an approval be granted, we have launched the supply available and we and Sandoz intend to launch as soon as possible following the FDA’s decision.

I will now discuss M356, our generic version of Teva’s Copaxone, which we are developing in collaboration with Sandoz. The ANDA for this product was submitted in 2007 and the FDA review is currently well underway. As we discussed previously, Teva filed a patent infringement suit against Sandoz and Momenta in August of 2008. The case is proceeding in the US District Court. On January 20, the Markman hearing was held. In a Markman hearing, the court considers and then construes the patent claims at issue in the case. As a reminder, there are nine patents in dispute and they are all related. At the hearing, both Teva and Sandoz Momenta presented arguments concerning the proper definitions for several terms in Teva’s patent claims. In addition, some of the Sandoz Momenta testimony centered on whether Teva had adequately defined certain key terms in their patents.

Although we are not going to comment on the specifics of the arguments, we believe that our attorneys presented a very strong case. We look forward to the judge’s ruling, which could come in about 90 days although it might be later. Because Sandoz Momenta filed a summary judgment motion prior to the hearing, the court also has the opportunity to determine that the patents are invalid as part of the decision. Alternatively the case will move forward to a trial, which would likely be scheduled for the second half of this year.

I will now turn to M118, our rationally engineered anticoagulant. Every element of the M118 development program, including the preclinical Phase I and Phase IIa studies has supported our design hypothesis of combining the positive attributes of both low molecular weight heparin and unfractionated heparin in order to provide a more flexible and potentially superior anticoagulant. In 2009, we announced the full results of the Phase IIa EMINENCE trial noting that the study achieved its primary endpoint. We are particularly encouraged to note that in patients in this study, all three doses showed lower total incidence of the composite endpoint and then did the active heparin control.

We continued to believe that M118 has the potential to become a baseline anticoagulant of choice for the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes regardless of treatment paths. In order to secure premium pricing it will be critical for M118 to demonstrate superiority over competitive agents in a pivotal trial of ACS patients. This means that the continued clinical development of the product will require a large Phase III trial of approximately 15,000 patients and a significant financial investment. Consequently we are actively seeking a collaboration partner to finance and support the further clinical development of M118. We have targeted global pharmaceutical companies that are committed and have expertise in the global development and commercialization of novel cardiovascular products.

With the recent mergers in the pharma industry and the fact that some companies are exiting the cardiovascular business, there are a limited number of companies that meet our criteria. We are currently in discussion with several companies. The terms we can negotiate with a partner will depend on several factors, including the amount of financial contribution that we at Momenta can provide. Until we receive a decision on M-Enoxaparin or enter into an M118 collaboration, we are not planning to dedicate additional resources to further the development of M118. We will not start the next trial until we have a partner or funding available, but we do remain committed to the product and its continued development.

Our second novel product, M402, is a heparin sulfate proteoglycans or HSPG targeted to oncology. Its development is an outgrowth of the founding vision of the company to leverage our proprietary technology to unlock the structural secrets of complex shutters and other complex mixtures. Both M118 and M-Enoxaparin have helped us to develop the tools necessary to begin to tap the broad therapeutic potential of heparin and relative molecules in the HSPG family. These molecular mixtures are unique in that they allow us to tailor products to go after multiple targets, attacking several components of the systems biology of a disease process in one agent. We are now conducting preclinical studies in M402 in supportive of future IND submission, and we hope to see the product candidate enter the clinic in the first half of 2011.

Next, I would like to discuss Follow-on Biologics. We are continuing to make scientific and technical advances in the development of our FOB toolkit. However we are still in need of legislation to establish a regulatory pathway for Follow-on Biologics. With the delay of broad healthcare reform, the legislation required to provide a Follow-on Biologics pathway is stalled. Without a Follow-on Biologics pathway available, we expect that more companies will pursue the existing BLA pathway as a route to develop and commercialize their biosimilar products until an abbreviated pathway to reality.

We continue to support the pass to the bill that allows for the development of therapeutically equivalent substitutable biologics and allows the FDA the power to make decisions on a case-by-case basis as does the most recent Senate passed FOB bill. I will note that we are pleased that the Obama administration has budgeted for the FDA to begin to develop the infrastructure for Follow-on Biologics. We believe that science and technology under development today can make this a reality and so we are continuing to invest in FOB development with a goal of creating truly interchangeable biogenerics.

To achieve our goal to develop and commercialize the portfolio of competitive Follow-on Biologics products, our FOB program will require scale and significant capital. So we are continuing to engage in discussions with potential collaborative partners. I should note that we also continued to invest in adapting our biologics tools to explore the development of novel biologics to lay the foundation for future product candidates as we grow our business. We are excited by the progress we are making in characterizing biologics products and continue to believe this program represents a significant opportunity for the company.

I would like to conclude by presenting the company’s goals for 2010. First, to achieve regulatory approval for M-Enoxaparin and to launch the product; second, to substantially advance the regulatory review of M356 and to complete the district court case of the patent litigation, to sign an M118 collaborative partnership agreement and further progress the M118 development program; to advance our Follow-on Biologics program with an ultimate intent to building a leading competitive position based on a portfolio of therapeutically equivalent substitutable biogeneric products; and finally, to advance our M402 program with an intent of filing an IND and initiating clinical studies in the first half of 2011.

I will now turn it over to Rick Shea to provide a financial update.

Rick Shea

Thank you, Craig. Collaborative revenue for the fourth quarter of 2009 was $5.6 million compared to $2.9 million for the same period last year. Collaborative revenues for the full year 2009 were $20.2 million compared with $14.6 million for the full year 2008. The increase in collaborative revenue was due to increased expenditures reimbursable by Sandoz on our M-Enoxaparin and M356 programs.

Research and development expenses for the fourth quarter of 2009 were $14.2 million compared to $15.4 million for the same period in 2008. The slight decrease in R&D expenditures is due to the completion of the M118 Phase IIa clinical study in the first half of 2009. R&D expenditures for the full year 2009 totaled $60.6 million, an increase of 10% from the $55.3 million incurred in 2008. The increase was due to increased cost of our M356 program.

The net loss for the fourth quarter of 2009 was $14.7 million or a loss of $0.34 per share as compared to a net loss of $18.4 million or a loss of $0.50 per share for the fourth quarter of 2008. The net loss for the full year 2009 was $64 million or a loss of $1.60 per share as compared with a net loss of $62.6 million or $1.74 per share for 2008. The decrease in the net loss for the quarter was a result of a decrease in self-funded R&D expenses offset by lower interest income. The slight increase in the net loss for the full year was due to lower interest income.

We ended the year 2009 with $95.7 million in cash and marketable securities compared with $108.5 million at the beginning of the year and $107.3 million at September 30, 2009. Our cash burn for the fourth quarter was $11.6 million.

With respect to guidance for 2010, we are looking at a range of scenarios relating to the potential approval and launch of M-Enoxaparin as well as potential partnering activity. Excluding any new collaborative partnering, we are projecting 2010 collaborative revenues to be approximately $10 million to $15 million. Since we expect to be transitioning the M-Enoxaparin programs from developmental stage to commercial, our 2010 collaborative revenues will primarily come from the M356 program.

With respect to our cash burn for 2010, since we consider our year-end cash balance to give us a two-year runway, we plan to manage our expenses so that under any scenario, our cash burn does not exceed approximately $50 million. We are of course very hopeful that an approval and launch of M-Enoxaparin will provide additional cash flow in 2010.

This concludes my financial review, we will now open the call to questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Thank you. (Operator instructions) We will go first to Joseph Schwartz with Leerink.

Joseph Schwartz – Leerink

Thanks for taking the call and congratulations on all the progress. I was wondering if you could address any impact that the recusal of Janet Woodcock has had on your review event Enox both on the pace and the potential outcome?

Craig Wheeler

Hi Jo, thanks, this is Craig. I really do not think it has had any impact that we conceive from our side. Obviously, we were very pleased with what the FDA said that there was no conflict of interest, and we were not part of that investigation but usually and officially Janet’s level does not get involved, at least as we understand it, in the approval of these types of applications. So we do not anticipate any problems there at this point.

Joseph Schwartz – Leerink

Okay, just as a quick follow-up on M356, the FDA review I think you said is currently well underway, I was wondering if you could give us a sense of a little bit more color on where you are in that review process, and the pace relative to the M-Enox review.

Craig Wheeler

Yes, we are really not commenting on the 356 process of the FDA. We do not comment in general on specific comments and because we are the first to file and we have a program behind us with (inaudible) application, we want to be very quiet in terms of where we are.

Joseph Schwartz – Leerink

Okay that is understandable. I will get back in the queue. Thanks.

Craig Wheeler

Thank you.

Operator

We will go next to Simos Simeonidis with Rodman & Renshaw.

Simos Simeonidis - Rodman & Renshaw

Yes, good morning guys, thanks for taking the question. The new USP standard that was out due at the end of 2009, in December of 2009, could you update us on when it has been issued an EPS? Do you believe that M-Enox met with the new USP standard?

Craig Wheeler

Sure, thanks for the question. Yes, the new USP standard, there were actually two standards that came out last year, a new standard for heparin and a new standard for Lovenox, and we fully comply with all of the old and all the new USP standards for the products.

Simos Simeonidis - Rodman & Renshaw

Great. And secondly you mentioned you have inventory, and you would be ready to launch as soon as possible in the event of an approval, could you give us a little more break [ph] now does it mean a matter of weeks, a month or two after the launch or I do not know if you can comment?

Craig Wheeler

I really cannot comment, I think it is fair to say that this product is being launched by Sandoz that is why we chose somebody like Sandoz as the partner there. They are very experienced engineers of launches and they I am sure will be on top of the launch. So, I really cannot say much more than that.

Simos Simeonidis - Rodman & Renshaw

Okay, thank you.

Operator

We will move next to Bret Holley with Oppenheimer.

Bret Holley – Oppenheimer

Yes, thanks for taking my question. I was wondering regarding the heparin supply chain, has the FDA formally giving you notice that you sites were in compliance as this is not held as a notification process for us.

Craig Wheeler

So the FDA gives notice back to all of the sites that they review. So that is a compliance division review and we are aware that all of the sites were in fact visited, and we are aware that they received word from the FDA that there were no 483 observations and the sites are cleared for production.

Bret Holley – Oppenheimer

Okay and then I guess some updated thoughts on how you think that some of this legislation might prove porous [ph] at this point given the fact that the broader healthcare bill appears dead, and where do you think that the progress might be made there?

Craig Wheeler

Well, it is pure speculation but I will give you my thoughts on it. I expect that Follow-on Biologics like many of the other components that were buried inside the bill will probably come out and get stand-alone bills unless something is reconstituted quickly in healthcare, which I doubt will happen. So I think you are likely to see a bill, I am not sure where it is going to be stacked up with the other kind of things that people are trying to get done in Congress and in healthcare. The good and the bad of that is we will get attention because it is a cost saving bill, so it has some merit, and that is certainly supported by the administration. The bad of it is that there is a real chance that all the provisions will get opened up for debate again until after (inaudible) through the profits again.

Bret Holley – Oppenheimer

I guess regarding your comment that there has been money budgeted for the FDA territory to create the infrastructure, I guess the question that I have is without the visibility on what the final legislation that is going to be, how can the FDA make progress in your mind?

Craig Wheeler

Well, I think there are two aspects to that, I quoted that to the FDA how they deploy it and right now it is only in the administrations budget, but we take it as a positive sign that the administration has budgeted because that clearly signals an intent by the administration at least to actually get the legislation in place. I would imagine the resources can certainly begin to technically beef up the technical staff necessary to handle more applications that would be coming in but specific pathways will probably be somewhat dependent on the legislation.

Bret Holley – Oppenheimer

Okay, great, thank you.

Craig Wheeler

Sure.

Operator

We will go next to Duane Nash with Wedbush Securities.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Good morning and thanks for taking the questions. Of the news reports that your partner Sandoz has been soliciting pre-orders from US customers for M-Enoxaparin, is there anything that you can confirm?

Craig Wheeler

We cannot confirm specifically any activities that Sandoz has been undertaking. I will comment generally on that in that generic launches, generic companies are typically out working with the accounts, but I cannot comment on any specific activity that is undertaken by Sandoz.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Second, a follow-up question, when companies tend to do this, do they tend to need to know how many launches there would be, whether there would be one generic launch or two generic launches, do they do this regardless of any information on that topic?

Craig Wheeler

I do not know the details on the launch process now that decision is made, so I really cannot comment, I could speculate but I do not think I should because I may not be accurate.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Okay and then one quick follow-up question, I have been parsing the wording of the press release where you state we believe we now have satisfactorily resolved all the outstanding technical and regulatory issues relating to approval and that is for M-Enoxaparin. So, for the sake of clarity, are there any remaining issues or --

Craig Wheeler

Sorry, as we have said, we feel we have met all the requirements for the approval of our ANDA. So as we sit here, we think we are fully approvable and ready to be approved at this point in time. I guess we parse our words carefully because there clearly can be things that are out of control in the applications that the applicants do not (inaudible). So, from our perspective, we feel very positive of where our application is.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

How long have you felt that way?

Craig Wheeler

We actually started talking at the end of November last year. I think I was using the words at that time cautiously optimistic and will be approved by the end of the year. And so we have not updated any guidance on that, and at this point we have no need to. We feel the same way at this point in time that we are in good shape with our application.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Great.

Craig Wheeler

We started at that time because that was when we got the final information that all of the plants have been inspected.

Duane Nash - Wedbush Securities

Great, thanks again.

Craig Wheeler

Sure.

Operator

We will go next to Ziad Bakri with Cowen.

Ziad Bakri – Cowen

Thanks. I guess just to follow on from the last question, what exactly do you think is the rate limiting step here in the FDA processes, do you think you have satisfied all the technical and regulatory hurdles? Do you think it is an FDA policy and also is there anything that has changed since November that gives you any more confidence in the process?

Craig Wheeler

I think I would say our confidence has not changed and we were quite confident in November. It is very hard to say what the rate limiting steps are in approving an application. In all of these generic applications you are dealing with multiple factions of the agency. Here we had the OGD involved, compliance was involved in inspections, the biologics group was involved in review of the immunogenicity, and then of course you had the leader [ph] group dealing with the Citizen’s Petition. So there are a lot of moving parts in the agency that have to coordinate in terms of an approval like this.

Ziad Bakri – Cowen

Okay, I guess it has been three months now since you have been cautiously optimistic, how much time would have to pass from now before your level of confidence starts to decrease?

Craig Wheeler

That is a good question, but I do not have a good answer for you. I think my view on that is if I continue to see the signals that the FDA’s action gave to me in the application, I am going to feel pretty positive about it. If I feel things are stalled, my mood would change pretty quickly, but I do not feel that way right now.

Ziad Bakri – Cowen

Okay, thanks very much.

Craig Wheeler

Sure.

Operator

(Operator instructions) We will go next to Ronny Gal with Bernstein.

Ronny Gal – Bernstein

Good morning and thank you for taking the question. I think the first question is really the decision why – I am not sure whose decision it was, but I understand you got a couple of programs on Follow-on Biologics that were terminated either by you or by Novartis, could you talk about this?

Craig Wheeler

Sure.

Ronny Gal – Bernstein

Can you help us a little bit understand what the issue is? I am kind of wondering if this is related to the realization you talked about earlier that at least in the next couple of years people will primarily be using the full BLA pathway?

Craig Wheeler

No, it actually was not. There were two programs, one had been canceled quite some time ago, it was a portfolio decision that Novartis had made, and so it had nothing to do with our program, our work. It was just a portfolio decision they had made. The second program was a program that we had done work on and we had concluded the work that we were doing, remember these were both ongoing programs that Novartis had, and so we still have an economic interest in that program since we had concluded our work, we re-negotiated the financial terms on that, we still have financial interest in that program.

Ronny Gal – Bernstein

Got you. Secondly, speaking about Follow-on Biologics, do you actually have a fast forward, how do you think about participating in the market assuming it would be very difficult to get into interchangeability standard in the next few years? Is there room for you guys to play even in the predominantly BLA pathway, the European path which now appears to require essentially clinical trials in most programs. Is there any way for you guys to monetize this initiatives without essentially a fully substitutable biosimilar?

Craig Wheeler

So there are two specific questions there and let me take them in two parts. One is I think it is more challenging for us to differentiate ourselves in a BLA full clinical trial scenario pathway. The second answer is an abbreviated pathway, even without substitutability, I think there is a real opportunity for what we can do and I think there is – because the tools we provide allow you to understand the exact characterization and the total deposit fees, we will understand and potentially have an advantage in terms of the clinicals that we think we will have an advantage in getting to substitutability sooner, and we think we are going to actually have lower failure rates because we will have much better impact into the cell lines that we have. So we think there are a lot of opportunities. But I do want to emphasize we think a pathway is important for us.

Ronny Gal – Bernstein

Okay. So I guess last time we talked was a few months ago and you kind of mentioned that you guys are now working on developing your own – cell lines developing some skills, addressing a program to the point that you will have enough there to give a bigger share of the upside when you seek a commercial partner. Can you give us a little bit of uptake where we stand there in terms of what your plans are in terms of internal development and at what point would you seek partnership with the problems you have internally?

Craig Wheeler

Sure, I can give you a little color but we are not talking or disclosing any problems yet but what we have said is that we are at the point now we are actually beginning to develop cell lines and advanced programs, so I think our goal there is to be able to have proof of concept in terms of the programs and know that we can actually do what we saying to do and begin to develop the foundations of our portfolio. In terms of partnerships, we are already in discussions with some parties. I think the terms in the nature of that will be somewhat dictated by what happens in Congress and the pathway. So we will have to see how that evolves over the course of the year.

Ronny Gal – Bernstein

Thank you very much.

Craig Wheeler

Sure.

Operator

This concludes the question-and-answer session. At this time, I will turn the call back over to Craig Wheeler for any additional or closing comments.

Craig Wheeler

Okay, thank you very much. I just want to thank everybody for joining us for our call and we will talk again next quarter.

Operator

Again, that does conclude today’s conference. We thank you for your participation.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Q4 2009 Earnings Call Transcript

Check out Seeking Alpha’s new Earnings Center »

This Transcript
All Transcripts