"Court case proved lack of IP coverage."
WRONG. As I've said before: the court case did not test infringement of Recell patents, it was contesting the granting of a patent on Renovacare's scam product. Avita tried to argue that the Renovacare patent was too similar to Recell's patents to have met criteria to be granted. The court disagreed. Meaning what Renovacare is doing is different. Which is true. Renovacare is doing a scam. Avita is doing the real deal.
"Court case proved lack of IP coverage."WRONG. As I've said...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 1 more message in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add AVH (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$3.92 |
Change
-0.020(0.51%) |
Mkt cap ! $219.7M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $3.92 | $3.94 | $3.86 | $1.167M | 299.6K |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 21 | $3.88 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $3.92 | 57378 | 2 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 02/12/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| AVH (ASX) Chart |
