Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
usa current price is around gbp 85 per share. does this indicate a settlement can be any time from now? delayed hearing is not favorable to doj, as some witness might not survive the pandemic (sorry to say this)
Camurus today
We see a large and growing interest in Buvidal across markets and a strong increase in the number of patients receiving treatment with Buvidal in Europe and Australia. Due to Covid-19, this trend is reinforced by the need to decrease non-essential clinic visits and optimize the use of resources in a strained healthcare system," says Fredrik Tiberg, President & CEO of Camurus.
"With its long duration of action, Buvidal dramatically reduces the need of frequent clinic and pharmacy visits for a vulnerable patient group - thereby also reducing the risk of spreading Covid-19," he continues.
Previously doj dares, becuase There are plenty of jobs in the market. Now, if doj does it, thousands of people will have no jobs and they will claim government for unemployment benefits, a monkey bounces back to themselves
i am reading in this way:
1. at first, indivior says "hey, the grand jury made a mistake and deliberately indict me, the case should be dismissed
2. the judge said, no, there is a mistake, but not justifies for a case dismissal
3. then indivior says DOJ wrongly obtained evidences, including biased ex. employee as evidences, because he has monetary incentive
4. DOJ replied but keep silent to employee point
5. judge said, no, DOJ, you need reply this specific point (Order)
6. DOJ can reply before 12 feb
7. there is a hearing on the motion, as whether DOJ illegally obtained evidences
employee monetary incentive is a very important point, not possible for DOJ to forget it in first round of argument, if it does, and judge pushes, it means it is embarrassing for DOJ to build up strong defence (hopefully, indivior can gain a upper hand over here)
cheers
According to filing in courtlistener, the judge seems is kicking the ass of the DOJ, and in my humble opinion, DOJ might have a problem here. finally the ice seems melting, and there is a glimpse of hope...cheers
judge's order
The defendants have filed a motion to suppress evidence resulting from execution
of a search warrant, and the government has opposed the motion. The defendants’ motion
raised an argument that the government did not address in its response, namely:
The SW Affidavit did not disclose that the cooperating witness had a
significant financial motive to cause the federal government to open an
investigation into Indivior. The cooperating witness had filed a qui tam
complaint against Indivior almost seven months prior to the government
obtaining the search warrant.
Defs.’ Mem. Supp. 7, ECF No. 262.
The SW Affidavit also failed to disclose that the cooperating witness — a
former Indivior employee — had an obvious monetary incentive to allege
that some employees aided and abetted healthcare fraud committed by
prescribing physicians. That fact should have informed the “totality of the
circumstances” analysis in determining probable cause by discounting the
SW Affidavit’s heavy reliance on a single, biased informant.
It appears the major battle ground for time being is whether DOJ has illegally obtained evidences to indict Indivior. Indivior has filed 261 MOTION to Suppress (Defendants' Motion to Suppress Illegally Seized Evidence & All Fruits Thereof. there are some back and forth arguments between DOJ and Indivior. According to latest courtlisenter, the latest document was filed by Indivior, via lawyer James Loonam https://www.jonesday.com/en/lawyers/l/james-loonam?tab=overview who worked in DOJ before. we hope Indivior can get some grounds at this critical point. We dont wish USA and DOJ is trying to kill a mockingbird.
On 16 Oct Judge Ordered
1. Defendants’ Motion To Compel, (Docket Item No. 117); and
2. Defendants’ Motion For Bill Of Particulars, (Docket Item No. 136).
These motions were heard before the undersigned by telephone conference call on
October 1, 2019. Based on the arguments and representations of counsel, the
Defendants’ Motion To Compel is DENIED, and the Defendants’ Motion For Bill
Of Particular is DENIED.
this is something under court discretion. now let's await decision on Motion to Dismiss
according to: https://ecf.vawd.uscourts.gov/doc1/19103723762?caseid=114970
1. INDV defended NOT GUILTY on ALL COUNTS
2. Court adjourned as court will take motions (including motion to dismiss) under advisement
conclusion no news on next week or near weeks, but surprise news can come out any time from now on, if government indeed week case. otherwise wait for 31 oct.
Thanks. personally I think Indivior is indicating wrong doing in grand jury, to support the dismissal argument. to seal a document only means there are sensitive information not wish public to get to know it (as otherwise might mis-use it)
1. hearing to compel to disclosure delayed as government wants more time to respond
2. seems Indivior in way of dismissing the case, is indicating wrong doing by jury
below is from Pacer. is my understanding to above 2 being correct? thanks
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SEAL
Pursuant to Rule 9 of this Court’s Local Rules, defendants Indivior Inc. and Indivior plc,
through undersigned counsel, move this Court for an order sealing the Defendants’ Reply
Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss the Indictment for Compound Grand Jury
Misconduct (the “Memorandum”), as well as the accompanying declarations of Thomas J.
Bondurant, Jr., Tamara Marinkovic Hines, and James R. Wooley (together, the “Declarations”).
Defendants move for this order because the Memorandum and accompanying Declarations quote
from the “original materials” covered by the Order entered by this Court on April 9, 2019, as
amended by this Court’s Orders of May 23, 2019 and August 12, 2019. Accordingly, Defendants
respectfully request that the Memorandum and Declarations be filed under seal. A redacted
Memorandum will be filed on the public docket.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/johnson-johnson-opioid-trial-judge-to-issue-landmark-verdict.html?recirc=taboolainternal
1. An Oklahoma judge is expected to issue a historic ruling Monday on whether Johnson & Johnson will be held responsible for the state’s opioid epidemic.
2. J&J has denied any wrongdoing.
3. A ruling against J&J could mean more big payouts in similar cases across the country.
Will the outcome of the J&J case have any impact to Indivior SP?
Latest Update - Motion to Compel (according to pacer)
1. government need respond before Sept 06, 2019 (signed by handling judge)
2. court conference hearing call for this Compel Motion set on Sept 10
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’
MOTION TO COMPEL
Notably absent from the government’s substantial production in this case are the
documents possessed by several federal agencies that the prosecution team knows would have
documents material to Indivior’s defense, including exculpatory information. Although Indivior
Inc. and Indivior PLC (collectively, “Indivior”) explicitly requested these materials in April 2019,
the government has now recently confirmed that the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) is
the only agency from which it intends to collect and produce documents in furtherance of its Rule
16 and Brady obligations. Not only is the government’s position contrary to its clearly established
disclosure obligations, the government’s otherwise massive document dump has also made it
entirely impractical for Indivior to identify other exculpatory or impeachment material within the
productions it has received.
In light of the government’s failure to comply with its obligations under Rule 16 and Brady,
Indivior respectfully requests that the Court grant its motion to compel and order that the
government (a) produce documents from all agencies known to have information material to
Indivior’s defense, including exculpatory information, and (b) identify within its multi-million
Case 1:19-cr-00016-JPJ-PMS Document 118 Filed 08/16/19 Page 1 of 26 Pageid#: 823
- 2 -
23059/1/8978553v1
page production the materials a reasonable prosecutor would deem exculpatory or otherwise
subject to production as impeachment material.
BACKGROUND
In 2002, the FDA approved Indivior’s product Suboxone for use in the treatment of opioid
dependence. Indictment ¶ 13 (ECF No. 3). Suboxone contains the opioid buprenorphine and is a
Schedule III drug, id. ¶ 12–13, reflecting a Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) assessment
that it has a relatively lesser potential for abuse than other “controlled substances.”1 As the first
drug of its kind approved by the FDA for treatment of opioid addiction outside a treatment clinic,
Suboxone made it possible for patients in treatment for opioid dependence to take their medicine
at home. Id. ¶¶ 12–13. Although the FDA initially approved Indivior’s tablet form of Suboxone
in 2002, the FDA has, over time, approved several forms of Indivior’s buprenorphine products,
including Suboxone Film in 2010. Id. ¶¶ 13–15, 29.
Indivior was indicted on April 9, 2019 following an investigation spanning more than five
years and involving a number of state and federal agencies. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Press Release,
“Indivior Inc. Indicted for Fraudulently Marketing Prescription Opioid” (Apr. 9, 2019) (hereinafter
“DOJ Press Release”).
Pacer court information system. On 16 August
Defendants Indivior Inc. and Indivior PLC (collectively, “Indivior” or “Defendants”),
through undersigned counsel, respectfully request that the Court enter an order requiring the
government to comply with its obligations under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(a)(1)(E)
and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). The government’s specific failures and the details of
Indivior’s requests are set forth in the accompanying Memorandum in Support of Defendants’
Motion to Compel.
quote
Federal prosecutors on Wednesday took another swing at Indivior Inc., the maker of opioid-dependence treatment Suboxone Film, with a new indictment accusing the company of misrepresenting to federal regulators the risk to children posed by the drug.
unquote
i think this is good news, it indicates that government knows its proceeding has no grounds, so they are now trying to build another battle ground...
do you agree?
furthur, one "evidence" to suport my prediction: previously rb made a risk reserve at usd 400m. then they said need increase risk reserve substantially. then it turned out to be usd 1.4b. indivior always risk usd 400m. risk reserve usually based upon legal opinions and commercial decisions. on a side note, indivior hired a famous ex procesutor in their legal team. details pls check dockets.