EXHIBIT 99.1
MYLAN LABORATORIES INC.
MODERATOR: PATRICK FITZGERALD
JULY 19, 2005
8:30 A.M. ET
Operator: Good day and welcome to this Mylan Laboratories Q1 fiscal 2006
earnings review conference call. Today's call is being recorded.
At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Patrick
Fitzgerald, Vice President for Public Relations. Please go ahead, sir.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Good morning everyone and welcome. Before we begin, we at
Mylan Laboratories wish to advise you as follows.
During today's call, including during the Q&A, we may make forward-looking
statements, including with regard to our anticipated business level, our
planned activities and our other expectations for future periods. These
statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Because these statements are
forward-looking, they
inherently involve risks and uncertainties and, accordingly, our actual
results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements. Factors that could or contribute to such
differences include but are not limited to the risk factors set forth in
our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2005, and in
our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and we
encourage you to refer to those. You may access our Form 10-K and other
periodic reports through the Web site of the Securities and Exchange
Commission at www.sec.gov.
Earlier this morning, Mylan issued a press release which contained
first-quarter results for fiscal 2006 as well as earnings guidance for
fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2007. The press release is available on our Web
site at www.mylan.com. Additionally, we are conducting a live Webcast of
this call which will be available on our Web site after the conclusion of
today's call for up to seven days.
This morning's call is being recorded. Please note that the material in
today's call, with the exception of the participant questions, is the
property of Mylan Laboratories and cannot be recorded or re-broadcast
without Mylan's express written permission.
And now I would like to turn the call over to Mr. Robert Coury, Mylan's
Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
Robert Coury: Thank you, Patrick. Good morning everyone, and thank you for
joining us this morning.
On behalf of the Mylan management team, we would like to once again take a
minute to thank all of our employees for their continued hard work and
dedication to our company.
Today, we are excited to provide you with our detailed first-quarter 2006
financial results and an update of other developments at Mylan. A lot has
occurred since we've held our investor call on June 14, including the
completion of a successful non-deal equity road show where we had the
opportunity to meet with many of our institutional shareholders and
discuss our strategies and outlook moving forward. We value this
interaction and also the feedback we receive from our shareholders.
Turning to this - to the first quarter, we are very pleased with the
results that we are reporting today and believe that they demonstrate that
fiscal 2006 is off to a strong start. We are executing on strategies that
we've outlined. We are also re-affirming our guidance for fiscal years
2006 and 2007. For fiscal 2006 we are re-affirming adjusted diluted
earnings per share guidance of 92 cents to a $1.15 per share, and for
fiscal 2007 we are re-affirming adjusted diluted earnings per share
guidance of $1.20 to $1.74 per share. We are especially proud of the
performance of our Fentanyl transdermal system which continues to command
significant
market share and remains the FDA's only approved generic alternative to
J&J's Duragesic.
I would also like to briefly address and clarify some of the media
coverage concerning Fentanyl and Duragesic over the past few days. As you
know, on July 15, the FDA issued a public health advisory regarding the
safe use of transdermal patches. First, let me be very clear. There have
been no developments brought to our attention as to the safety of these
products. Fentanyl represents a significant clinical contribution as a
potent schedule two opioid agonist. In the treatment of controlled pain,
Fentanyl's opioid abuse properties are significantly less when compared to
other products in the scheduled class such as morphine, oxycodone,
methadone and others.
In early February 2005, Health and Human Services at a meeting with the
industry discussed issues such as drug abuse, patient compliance, and
labeling instructions and the development of a risk management programs
for the Schedule II opioid agonist. The risk of this class of drugs with
their serious adverse events has long been understood. The FDA has
implemented an enhanced labeling instructions and last Friday communicated
directly to physicians and consumers to a public health advisory. While
Mylan believes it has experienced a very small number of adverse events
with our product, we are confident that adverse events are not associated
with the quality of our product. It is Mylan's understanding that the
recent statements reported by the FDA regarding 120 deaths come from a
review of the FDA's existing adverse events database pertaining to J&J's
Duragesic. Mylan has been and will continue to work with the FDA on this
issue. Mylan strongly supports the FDA's efforts to appropriately educate
physicians, health care professionals and patients on the safe utilization
of these Schedule II drugs. In this vitally important category, the
long-standing efforts of the FDA's policy have been to improve or enhance
the safe use of these drugs. In light of the FDA's continued work on this
issue, our ability to respond to questions concerning fentanyl is limited.
As you know, we also announced on June 14 that we intend to out-license
nebivolol, our highly anticipated beta blocker, to a major brand
pharmaceutical company that will co-develop and commercialize this
exciting product. We are progressing with our negotiations and will
provide additional details at the appropriate time. It is still our
current intention to have a partner secured before the end of this
calendar year.
I would now like to address the preliminary results of our recently
completed modified Dutch auction sale tender which expired at 12:00
midnight this past Friday. From our perspective, the sale tender was an
overwhelming success with preliminary indications that we will purchasing
51,282,051 shares of our common stock, approximately 19 percent of the
shares outstanding at a purchase price of $19.50 per share. We also intend
to repurchase an additional $250 million of our shares, which is expected
to be completed during this calendar year in the open
market. The follow-on repurchase combined with the Dutch auction sale
tender are expected to result in the repurchase of nearly 25 percent of
our shares outstanding.
Next I would like to comment on the activities of Mr. Icahn and his
affiliate entities. Mr. Icahn has now publicly confirmed that he has
tendered virtually all of his Mylan shares. We will be purchasing on a pro
rata basis approximately 94% of Mr. Icahn's tendered shares which will
reduce his ownership position from approximately 26.2 million shares, or
approximately 9.9% of our stock, to approximately 1.6 million shares, or
less than three quarters of one percent of our stock. In a press release
issued yesterday, Mr. Icahn continued to attempt to take credit for all of
our recent strategic initiatives. As we've stated many times in the past,
we believe that the investment community can see through Mr. Icahn's
self-interested motives which believe are distinct and at odds with other
Mylan investors. Our Board's decisions have never been and never will be
unduly influenced by Mr. Icahn or any other external pressures. Mylan's
Board has always and will continue to act in the best interest of all
shareholders. Mr. Icahn has consistently maintained that he was a
purported buyer at $20 per share, but in reality he tendered to be a
seller at $19 per share. We believe that our Board and our management
team's actions have spoken louder than Mr. Icahn's rhetoric. At this time
we have no new information on these results of the tender or Mr. Icahn's
actions beyond what we've already stated. And because we'd like to keep
today's
call focused on the first quarter results, we will not be taking any
questions related to Mr. Icahn on today's call.
With that said I will turn the call over to Ed Borkowski, our Chief
Financial Officer, for a more detailed financial review and then open up
the call for questions.
Edward Borkowski: Thanks, Robert and good morning.
Earlier today, we reported our financial results for the first quarter
ended June 30th, 2005. Net revenues for the quarter were $323.4 million, a
decrease of $15.6 million from the prior year first quarter. The decrease
in net revenues is attributable to unfavorable pricing partially offset by
revenues from new products launched since July 1, 2004. During the first
quarter, new products contributed net revenues of $55 million,
substantially all of which was due to fentanyl which was launched during
our fourth quarter of fiscal 2005. New products contributed net revenues
of $64.1 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005, also largely due to
fentanyl. As we've discussed in prior quarters, increased competition has
led to price erosion on several of the products in our portfolio.
Omeprazole, Carbidopa-Levodopa and Amnesteem are three of the products
that were most significantly affected.
For the first quarter of fiscal `06, gross margins were 52% compared to
53% in the first quarter of the prior year. This decrease is preliminary
the result of this unfavorable pricing. On a sequential quarter basis,
gross margins for the quarter ended June 30th, 2005, increased to 52% from
48% for the quarter ended March 31, 2005. This increase reflects a full
quarter of fentanyl sales without the impact of costs incurred in
conjunction with the product's launch.
Earnings from operations decreased $66.9 million to $59.6 million as a
result of the decrease in gross profit, increased operating expenses and
several special items which occurred during the quarter. Included in
operating expenses for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 was $10.2 million
or two cents per share net of tax, of costs including restructuring costs
related to the closure of Mylan Bertek. These costs, the majority of which
are included in selling, general and administration, relate primarily to
severance, automobile lease termination costs and sample inventory
write-offs. Our restructuring plan is on track to be completed by
September 30, 2005 as originally announced.
Also included in the quarterly results is $12 million, or three cents per
share net of tax, related to a contingent liability with respect to our
previously disclosed Lorazepam and Clorazepate product litigation.
Although a jury verdict was rendered against Mylan on June 1, 2005, we
continue to believe that we have meritorious defenses with respect to
these claims and intend to continue to vigorously defend our position,
including pursuing a motion for judgment as a
matter of law or, in the alternative, a new trial, and if those motions
are denied, pursuing an appeal. Including in the first-quarter results of
fiscal 2005 were net gains on legal settlements which totaled $26 million,
or six cents per share net of tax.
Net earnings for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 were $42.9 million, a
decrease of $39.1 million from the first quarter of fiscal '05. GAAP
earnings per diluted share were 16 cents compared to 30 cents in the prior
year. Adjusted diluted explains for the first quarter of fiscal 2006 was
26 cents compared with 24 cents in the prior year. Adjusted diluted EPS
for the current quarter excludes the two cents per share of restructuring
cost and three cents per share of litigation cost discussed earlier as
well as five cents per share of ongoing costs related to Mylan Bertek
which excludes restructuring cost but includes certain ongoing research
and development and marketing costs related to Nebivolol that will be
incurred until that licensing agreement related to such product is signed.
A reconciliation of first-quarter adjusted diluted EPS to GAAP diluted EPS
can be found in our release issued earlier today.
Adjusted diluted EPS is a non-GAAP measure. We have not previously
disclosed non-GAAP financial measures when providing our historical
financial results. However, due primarily to the closing Mylan Bertek and
the planned out-licensing of Nebivolol, we now believe that an evaluation
of our ongoing operations and comparisons of current operations with
future operations would be
difficult if we discussed only financial measures prepared in accordance
in GAAP. Additionally, adjusted diluted EPS is a measure that we use
internally for forecasting and budgeting purposes. It should be noted that
non-GAAP measures such as adjusted diluted EPS should be used only as a
supplement to, not as a substitute for, or as a superior measure to
measures of financial performance prepared in accordance in GAAP.
It should be noted that the effects of the Dutch auction self tender and
the related financing will not affect our earnings per share until the
second quarter of fiscal 2006. Cash flows from operations for the quarter
were $106.4 million due primarily to net earnings and increased working
capital, including a decrease in accounts receivable as a result of cash
collections. As a result, cash and marketable securities increased by
approximately $78.7 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. Capital
expenditures were $25.1 million for the current quarter, and we remain on
track to meet our estimated full-year capital expenditures of
approximately $120 million.
That concludes my remarks and I'll turn the call back over to Patrick.
Patrick Fitzgerald: OK. We'll now open the line up for a question and answer
session. In order to get to as many questions as possible we're again
asking each participant to limit themselves to two questions, and we'd ask
that you please ask both questions up front.
Operator, we're ready for the first question.
Operator:Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please do so by
pressing the star key followed by the digit one on your touch-tone
telephone. If you are using a speakerphone, please make sure your mute
function is turned off to allow your signal to reach our equipment. Once
again, please limit yourself to two questions and please pose both
questions at the same time. Again, that is star one on your touch-tone
telephone.
Our first questions will come from Rich Silver with Lehman Brothers.
Rich Silver: Hi. Can you hear me?
Robert Coury: Yes, Rich. How are you?
Rich Silver: Good, Robert. How are you?
Robert Coury: Good.
Rich Silver: First question is on Duragesic, and was wondering if you had an
opinion as to whether the FDA's public advisory would have any impact or
already might have an impact on future generic approvals.
Robert Coury: Rich, I don't want to speculate or - again, I'm very sensitive
never to convey that we at Mylan are going to speak for the FDA or in
front of the FDA. But track record would I think be indicative. If it is
indicative, I think track record would say that, especially at this time,
given the label changes that they recommended, given some of the risk
management programs I think that they're going to want to have in place, I
would think that from our perspective - again, not speaking for the FDA -
that it would cause some delay in future approvals until the FDA's
extremely comfortable about all the programs I think it wants to have in
place.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Rich Silver: No...
Robert Coury: Wait, hold on...
Operator: I'm sorry...
Patrick Fitzgerald: Operator...
Operator: ...just one moment.
Rich Silver: Hello?
Robert Coury: Yes, Rich.
Rich Silver: Yes, sorry. Just got one more question.
Robert Coury: OK.
Rich Silver: You said something about no new - no developments had been brought
to Mylan's attention with regard to Duragesic. What do you mean by that?
Robert Coury: Thanks for asking that, Rich. There has been - I mean, everything
that I see and hear about the Duragesic and all the media that I've seen,
the most surprising thing to me is that there is nothing new out there. I
mean, there is nothing new that has been brought to our attention that we
have not seen all along in our development program, which as you know took
two and a half years. There is nothing new that has been brought to our
attention all the way up to this moment that I'm talking to you. So, you
know, all of the information and if you go back, Rich, and remember the
citizens' petitions that were filed days before our final approval, you'll
see that all of these issues have been well-vetted in front of the FDA -
J&J's position, Mylan's position, all the issues around Duragesic, all the
database that the FDA - that's public with the FDA. There is nothing new
around this whole - around the transdermals that we have seen or anything
new
that has been brought to our attention. And, quite frankly, we applaud the
FDA for putting out the advisory and we, you know, firmly and thoroughly
support their efforts in trying to educate the population.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: Our next question will come from Timothy Chiang with Natexis
Bleichroeder.
Timothy Chiang: Hi, Robert. I wanted to get the feel on your pipeline. Any sort
of updates on Norvasc, Ditropan XL or Levaquin that you could talk about?
Robert Coury: The only thing - let me state what I stated. I think already - as
you know, Amlodipine - let me start there. We are hopeful to get a final
approval on Amlodipine by the next quarter. And as you know, we've not
been sued within the 45 days and we have not made any public announcements
about what we intend on doing. As far as the Topamax or Topiramate, we
expect the summary judgment ruling, Tim, probably in the next six weeks,
four to six weeks, we're hopeful. And as far as the Oxybutynin, we just
finished the lower court - the district court trial at the end of May. We
do expect by the end of this calendar year to hear from the judge in that
case. And then as far as our Levofloxacin, we do - we are at the appellate
court level and we do expect to hear from the appellate court judges in
the first quarter of calendar year '06.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: Our next question will come from Michael Tong with Wachovia.
Michael Tong: Hi. Just a couple of questions. Number one, Ed, can you walk me
through the five-cent charge in Nebivolol and Bertek expenses and point me
to where I can find it on the P&L? And, secondly, if I look at sequential
revenue excluding fentanyl, it seems like you went from about 252 to
260-plus, and you commented about some price declines and things like
that. Can you point to the source of the sequential revenue gain excluding
generic Duragesic?
Edward Borkowski: Let me address the first question. The five cents is between -
in the R&D and S&G line - SG&A line. It's approximately five million
related to R&D and 15 million related to the SG&A.
Gary Sphar: OK. Relating to the sequential increase, when you strip out
fentanyl, as we indicated last quarter there were some customers that had
worked out their inventory of ours. Those customers then came back on-line
a little bit this quarter accounting for that slight increase in revenue.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: Our next question will be from Banc of America, David Maris.
David Maris: Morning. Two questions, Robert. First, I asked one of your
competitors about authorized generics, and they said, well, Mylan was most
against it and now Mylan's looking to do authorized generics, so how hard
are they going to fight the authorized generics. So maybe if you could
just give us an update on, you know - you had said last quarter that maybe
you would start to look to sign deals like that. How receptive have
companies been, you know, what stage is that effort in? And then,
secondly, what are you seeing on pricing in the marketplace? You had a
nice move in gross margin. But is Duragesic, you know, worse than you
thought and the other pricing better than you thought? Or where is
Duragesic pricing? Thank you.
Robert Coury: Let me - let me start off with the second one first, David. As
we've mentioned, Duragesic is a very large product in our portfolio. And
even with the very low generic-to-brand pricing that you should expect
when you only have two competitors out there, us and the authorized
generic, with the brand company, even with the low generic-to-brand price
this is still a very high gross profit margin product. And it's this
product that we have anticipated that going forward that this product
would represent our ability to forecast an increase in overall gross
margin as we go forward, even forecasting an additional competitor of
fentanyl coming in this current second quarter as well as an additional
one coming in next quarter. We still view fentanyl to be a very high gross
margin product. And in addition to that, even though fentanyl was the
predominant driver, we do
have other products that we see rolling in, that we have not announced
publicly which products that they are, but upon approval. Also we believe
will yield a higher gross profit margin, which again will all, you know,
go to the increase, the kick-up that we see in gross profit margin
overall.
As far as the authorized generics, as I stated previously, we will
absolutely unequivocally continue to vigorously fight against authorized
generics. We believe that the playing field has now been limited to the
legislation and that we feel that now that we've gone full circle between
the FTC, now that we've made and raised all of our issues CMS, now that we
have gone to the FDA, now that we have fought this issue in the courts, in
the judicial system, we now believe that we have a clear understanding of
what the rules of engagement are to those regulatory bodies who regulate
our industry in terms of their present views on authorized generics. Given
that, which is what we've sought all along and even though we particularly
don't like some of the answers, at least - at the very least we understand
their now - I'm going to now say consistent views of what their thinking
is.
Therefore I cannot withhold for the Mylan shareholder not to participate
into the authorized generic market. And as I said, as appropriate, and
which I'll explain one example as we go forward here. But while we are
doing that, I will tell you that we are absolutely committed to work with
the legislatures and to, you know, once and for all have them correct what
we believe is being abused, and that is a
provision in the statutory language that specifically - the whole purpose
of the legislative intent back in `84 was to simply award the generic
company who would put their balance sheet forth in order to go after these
frivolous patents and other tactics used by brand companies.
If a generic company was prepared to put their balance sheet forward and
risk their P&L to go after these types of activities, the only reward that
was set aside for the generic company was what I call that sacred 180-day
timeframe.
We never had a problem with the authorized generic coming in after the 180
days or any other time, because as a generic company, you know, we're very
accustomed to having five, six, seven, eight, 10, 15 competitors. What's
another competitor? The only thing that we have told the brand companies
and the FDA and all the other bodies is that, look, all we're saying is it
doesn't make sense that there's an industry set up, and legislation that
has been put in place that strikes this natural balance to have generic
companies use their balance sheets to go after those same very companies
who are - who have frivolous patents and are using other tactics and after
we win have a provision for a reward for us for doing it in the first
place and then allow the same people that we've gone after to participate
in our reward. It just makes no sense.
So we understand now there to be a legislative loophole. We think that we
can correct that legislative loophole. But it's going to take legislation
to correct it.
Therefore, it'll take us, we believe, approximately 18 months or so before
we think we can gain any success. However, we do see a short-term
potential reprieve in that the Center of Medicare and Medicaid Services,
CMS, is now considering to have authorized generics included in the brand
company's best price reimbursement practices.
We think that if CMS, you know, follows through and changes policy about
including authorized generic and the brand's reimbursement, which simply
makes sense, then we think it won't eliminate it, we think it'll be a
deterrent.
How Mylan will participate in the authorized generics - and I said the
word "as appropriate" - for example, go back to Mylan's Nifedipine. If you
recall prior to me coming into office, Mylan had an authorized generic
when it filed a paragraph four against Pfizer's Nifedipine product on a
single strength. Mylan, the day before the trial was begin, settled Pfizer
and became their authorized generic distributor on all three strengths.
And so if you look at that example and you look at the paragraph four
filings that we now have, the largest in the company's history - out of 44
products we have 12 first to file - I think one of the low-hanging fruits
for a place where I see a settlement making all the sense in the world
where it could be a win for the brand, a win for the generic, and more
importantly, David, a win for the consumer. If the appropriate settlements
are structured, we believe it'll be a win on all three fronts,
and I think one of the places you could look at as the potential
settlement, especially since the FTC - a ruling of the FTC has been
overturned making it easier for brand and generic companies to entered
into these type of settlements, I believe that's what you can expect from
us going forward.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: That will come from Buckingham Research, David Buck.
David Buck: Yes, hi. A question for Robert is, first, can you just give a
comment on what you see as the M&A environment currently in generics? And
secondly, for Ed, can you give us a sense of gross margin, what if any
impact was had from API activity, focused on purchasing of API, et cetera.
Robert Coury: Ed, do you want to start first and then I'll give him a -
Edward Borkowski: Typically we don't really break out that kind of detail. I
mean, we do achieve API benefit from sourcing and negotiate - ongoing
negotiations, David, but we really don't break out that level of detail in
terms of what's driving that margin.
Robert Coury: But I assure you, David, one of the things you can expect that
we're doing on an ongoing basis is continuing to drive our cost of goods
down. And, yes, you
know, one of the reports that came out by one of the analysts talking
about additional DMF files that have been filed, I will tell you that - I
think it was David Maris who said there were 500-and-something filed
versus 270 last year. We don't view that as an additional competitive
barrier.
We actually view that as an opportunity for us. And the reason why we do
is because the more DMF files that are out there, the more opportunities
we have as a manufacturer to reference those DMF files, therefore setting
up the natural competitive environment to continue to drive our cost of
goods down. So I will tell you that you can expect that we're constantly
and have been and will continue to drive our cost of goods down every
opportunity that we have to maintain our competitivecy in this - in this
environment we're in.
As far as, David, the M&A activities, I certainly from my perspective
anticipate going forward, I've said along that I believe that
consolidation in the industry is a must. I don't think that - I don't
think it needs to happen so much for companies to get together to squeeze
out synergies only to add incremental EPS and satisfy simply Wall Street's
appetite. I think it's simply a must for survival in this industry
long-term.
I think that, you know, one of the benefits that Mylan has always yielded
is its efficiencies through its ability to be the largest generic domestic
pharmaceutical company here in America, and the efficiencies that we yield
are yielded because
95 percent of what we do we are vertically integrated, we are the most
vertically integrated company from the time that we identify an
opportunity, bring it through R&D, scale it up, manufacture and deliver
the compound. When you're as vertically integrated as a Mylan is, truly
the efficiencies that we yield coupled with the excellence in our
manufacturing, out of the 12 and a half billion tablets and capsules,
David, we only had a .1-percent rejection rate.
So if you think about our ability to get commercial prices on every single
last tablet and capsule coupled with the other efficiencies that we yield
due to our vertical integration and our ability to continue to drive our
cost of goods down, I will tell you that not every company enjoys that
position. What you will find when you take away Mylan and the sheer size
of a Mylan, you actually have a very fragmented industry. You actually
have, you know, smaller companies that specialize in other various areas.
And I think that when you take a look at those smaller companies and you
take a look at the breadth and width of their product portfolio that they
offer, by those type of companies getting together they have much more to
gain in consolidation in terms of being able to maintain the competitivecy
we think is necessary to survive in this industry long-term. One, if you
take companies that specialize in R&D, marry them up with companies that
specialize with manufacturing and then marry it up with companies who have
a good ANDA strategy, you then have the
beginnings of what I call vertical integration so that they too can yield
out the efficiencies that we've enjoyed here at Mylan.
And more importantly, David, the most important metric is to enhance a
company's product portfolio, to expand their bandwidth so that they begin
to have the critical mass and the type of product portfolio that I believe
can give them the standing that you would want to have with the customer
base that's out there.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: And we'll hear from Elliot Wilbur with CIBC World Markets.
Elliot Wilbur: Good morning. Two questions. First has to do with a recent
declaratory judgment action that you guys have filed against Merck on
Finasteride. I'm wondering is this more of a tactical maneuver designed to
possibly open up this market prior to the expiration of exclusivity by the
first filer based on a recent change or apparent change in interpretation
of what constitutes a final court decision, and might we see more activity
from the company in this respect, or am I just reading too much into this
and the circumstances are very unique to this product. And then second
question, for Ed, how much of the $250 million open market repurchase has
already been - or how many shares have already been bought back under that
authorization? Thanks.
Edward Borkowski: Let me address the second question first. The follow-on -
cannot commence until 10 days after the Dutch ends.
Robert Coury: Business days.
Edward Borkowski: Business days. So nothing will begin until those 10 days are
up. And I think as we stated, we expect to complete that by the end of the
calendar year.
Robert Coury: And Elliott, if you - certainly you know I cannot comment on any
potential litigation activity. So I can't answer the first question.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Next question, please.
Operator: It appears there are no further questions at this time. Mr.
Fitzgerald, I'll turn the conference back to you for additional or closing
remarks.
Patrick Fitzgerald: Well, thank you, operator, and thank you, everyone, for
joining us today. We look forward to joining you again to report on our
second quarter financial results.
Operator: And that does conclude today's conference call. We thank you all for
your participation and have a great day.
* * *