About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs


  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« Conference & CLE Calendar | Main | Court Report »

October 21, 2007


Thanks for an excellent summary of what has been happening and of the actions being taken by the ophthalmic community to fight this disgraceful act by Genentech.

You are also correct in your statement that the comparative study of Avastin vs. Lucentis (the CATT study), being funded by the NEI will not be affected by Genentech's action.

I have been in touch with two of the principal investigators of the CATT Study and both have assured me that UPenn, the overseer of the study, will be compounding the doses of Avastin needed for the study and will be supplying it to the 47 clinics involved.

For the latest information about the CATT Study, please refer to my web Journal:



Irv Arons

The comments to this entry are closed.

July 2024

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31