Member Info for RuckRover

>state the obvious Ruck well done ! lol<
Someone has to lol

Inan,

You asked:

"exactly what information does the market want to move it up ? "

That's quite simple:

News that SCIB1 combo trial has STARTED
Good results data from the SCIB1 combo trial
News that the MODI1 trial has started
Good results from MODI trial
News of a deal providing funding

Once you have some of these, the SP should be north of here.
Once you have all of these, the SP should be WELL north of here

Inan, you wrote:
** Quote **
what does that mean .... Mr Ruck QC the man who is underwater in scancell and for some unknown reason is determined to undermine

The Patent system

The science behind scancell

** Unquote

1. You cannot know whether or not I am "underwater" so why say it and make yourself look stupid?

2. I have never undermined the patent system. It has been operating for over 200 years and works well in the main. If I have undermined anything today it is only you as you stated "the patent PROVES novel art" and it doesn't.

3. I have never undermined Scancell's science in fact, hardly mentioned it today. I think the science is sound, very promising. the upcoming trials will give us an idea how good it actually is.

I would ask you to refrain from misquoting me but I don't suppose you will. ATB

>it's like trying to prove a circle is not round …<

No it's not! :)

No?

I rest my case!

Inan,

Have you actually been through a patent application process yourself?

Inan,

"all you are doing Ruck is throwing in a Red Herring ......…"

No, it is not a red herring at all. The topic of patent protection is extremely important. As an investor, I would be very concerned if Scancell did NOT have patent protection. The fact companies (well most anyway) rise on the news of patent application and patent grant demonstrates the financial necessity.

However. When you use terms like "inevitable" and "Proves Novel Art" that are factually incorrect, it could give others a false impression that there are no risks. The risk may be small but it exists.

And as to a challenge that I can't identify, that is the point - no one has yet. The reason you haven't is that you haven't read the tens of thousands of scientific papers that may contain something.

AIMHO.

Inan,

you asked:
"What exactly is the debate Ruck..... ? "

also you follow up with:
"the point of the "inevitable posts" is the US patent will get granted at some point ... "

This demonstrates your inability to grasp the big picture. Having been approved in Europe (and elsewhere) it is unlikey not to get approved, but it's NOT "inevitable". There are a few scenarios where it may not, you just haven't thought of then (or even tried)

What you have done is ticked the patent box and trotted off happy.

Then you come out with:

"we have the patent .......... which proves "Novel Art" "

No it doesn't. It shows that in the opinion of the patent office, it IS novel art, far from being "proved"

The only time it is "proved" is when you get sued for patent infringement and win your case or you sue someone else for patent infringement and win your case.

As a patent holder myself, I know something about these things.

TF, I have to agree with you for once! I’m not sure what the “inevitable” was in this case but very few things are “inevitable”. If some feels something is, then it is quite right and proper to debate it and make the case.

RW,
>I trust LD to have sufficient knowledge of her field that she wouldn't put in a patent that infringed or was not novel. <
I wouldn't expect LD to trawl through tens of thousands of documents looking for infringement - that's the patent office's job.
Was it cane or slipper?

Konar, many thanks. A really useful contribution to the BB appreciated by all I'm sure - and in less than 100 words!

Konar,
sorry, we are all a bit thick here, but what's the heads up?

crumbs,

"SCIB1 trial still on track"

It may still be on track but stuck up a siding. Still, better than being completely derailed.

Welcome to the BB. Room here for all points of view, they will all be respected and debated with vigour but decorum.
May I ask, do you have a large holding?

This is why it is critical that the scib1/Keytruda combo study gets started ASAP as we think the results could be spectacular.

So to put it simply.

The problem immunology vaccines have is that even when they stimulate T cell production, the cancer is hidden by pd1.

The problem with pd1 inhibitors is its no good exposing the cancer if there are no T cells to destroy it.

However, in combination - bingo!

Thanks C7.

The bb needs less clutter....

How dare you! On Friday you posted 2000 words of cut and paste gobbledygook. No one here is in the least interested in that. What they want to know is when they are going to get a return on their investment. I can humour you if you want to spam the board with stuff you want to but please give others the same courtesy. Btw, if you don’t know what it means look it up.

C7, watching now, behind real time so don’t tell me anything. Went to see my dad in hospital, he has had pneumonia off and on for over a year but was very chirpy today. I guess you will know what it’s like. Not nice at any age but at 89 not good. Y

C7, well said. I think we’d all benefit by giving and receiving respect. Sometimes you need look at the commonality rather than the differences. For example, I proffered some reasons why we had taken on two extra staff (which were widely ridiculed) one of my reasons was “necessity”. Crumbs today used the term “prerequisite “. Well isn’t a prerequisite a necessity?
Enjoy the match tonight.