Seeking Alpha

Daniel B. Ravicher

View as an RSS Feed
View Daniel B. Ravicher's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Thoughts On The Celgene Revlimid Markman Hearing [View article]
    You're welcome, Ray. I'm glad you found my article useful. There are no deadlines on the judge, but, yes, I expect a Markman opinion from her in 2-3 months. As for settlement, I would assume the parties are at least considering it, and it's always something that's possible, but I'm not sure there's any zone of overlap in expectations and desires such that a deal could get done, at least not at this point. There are just too many open issues on which the parties surely disagree (i.e. claim construction, infringement, validity, multiple patents, FDA approval, etc.).
    May 17 09:25 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Analysis Of Oral Argument In Vringo Vs. Google Patent Infringement Appeal [View article]
    No, they didn't need to, because no one worries they won't have the cash to pay the awarded judgment. $31M is nothing to them, so there's no risk they'll be broke when it comes time to pay.
    May 8 03:54 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Addressing Revlimid Patents Questions From Celgene's Q1 2014 Call [View article]
    Today the generic Natco stipulated (conceded) infringement of some of the asserted Celgene Revlimid patents: http://bit.ly/1itwJ6z.
    May 7 10:12 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Addressing Revlimid Patents Questions From Celgene's Q1 2014 Call [View article]
    Thanks, Ted. The "unclean hands" issue is a relatively minor one in my opinion. It's very hard for a generic to prove patent invalidity/unenforceab... in the first place, so the fact that Celgene's unclean hands argument may make it impossible doesn't move the needle much in my expectation of outcome. I think Celgene raised it more in an effort to sling mud at the generics in front of the judge. Ultimately, I doubt she'll preclude the generics from arguing Celgene's patents are invalid/unenforceable due to unclean hands, but I also doubt she'll forget about what they did, which they haven't denied.
    Apr 28 01:17 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    Again, when you can't counter someone's substantive arguments, you start name calling. I hate it when the blind lead the blind off cliffs.
    Mar 27 11:42 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    I have no position in VHC at the moment, so am not talking my book. A "pumper" is someone who calls a company having to "file[] a request for the PTAB to reconsider their decision" a "big hit" for the company. It's precisely the opposite.

    Believe me, nothing would make me happier than for VHC to be worth gazillions of dollars. I was long not too long ago. But, then the facts changed (i.e. the Court of Appeals argument suggested, to me, that the $360M verdict will not stand), and so I changed my position, especially after the company issued a very suspiciously timed 8-K announcing just one part of a decision from the district court without providing all the details of that decision or providing a copy of it or even an explanation why they couldn't provide a copy of it or why they waited until that day and that time to issue the 8K.
    Mar 27 11:41 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    I've been called much worse by much better, anonymous poster.
    Mar 27 11:20 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    There we go, with the typical low brow childish response from a scared pumper being called out for his weak sauce. So, Jeff, will you commit, today, to saying that if RPX refiles its requests and the PTAB accepts those, that would be negative news for VHC? Or will you then say, "Well, VHC will win the IPR?" Just FYI, the vast majority of IPRs that have been completed so far have resulted in claims being cancelled. But, that's my own research, so I'll let you do yours.
    Mar 27 11:15 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    ... so says anonymous poster too scared to put his/her real name, address and other personal info. Don't be a hater just because you're holding on to a stock after what was undeniably a horrible Court of Appeals oral argument. I gave everyone plenty of notice of my opinion immediately thereafter, some 40% ago.
    Mar 27 11:09 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    VHC is down some 45% since the Fed Cir oral argument. I think the market is telling us what it thinks. Your bio does not say you're an attorney, so I assume you are not one, and I assume you have never argued before the Federal Circuit?
    Mar 27 11:02 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    Then why did you sign up with SA as an anonymous contributor? They'll change that for you, so you can be transparent.
    Mar 27 11:01 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    I also publish under my own name, because I don't have anything to hide. I strongly dislike, and discourage anyone to put faith in, anonymous contributors.
    Mar 27 10:55 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • VirnetX Scores A Big Hit In The RPX IPR Petitions [View instapost]
    Strawsine: When I publish research, I link to all source documents. As for doing research, I made the call to short VHC after the Fed Cir argument. It's down more than 40% since then. These IPR's provide VHC no upside. The only thing they can be is downside. So, even if they get dismissed, that doesn't put VHC in any better place that it already is. Good luck with your investments.
    Mar 27 10:42 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Day 5 Of The Juniper Vs. Palo Alto Patent Trial [View article]
    One of the experts testified he was being paid 700/hr for his work on the case. I've known experts who are paid 1000/hr or more.
    Mar 5 02:23 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Did Palo Alto Really 'Win' Juniper Patent Decision? [View article]
    I've written a report with my observations and thoughts from today's first day of the JNPR v PANW trial and made it available here: http://seekingalpha.co....
    Feb 24 06:59 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
373 Comments
382 Likes