corporate the I to Thank XXXX and call. quarter and providing will update key stress a you, begin welcome IntelGenx's just developments conference in by quarter. Steve. afternoon Good third the
will Andre results before for we QX that, review Following financial line our questions. open up your the
film. the for with and RIZAPORT resubmission resubmitted the Along milligram first, key XXX(b)(X) we of to include, milligrams the for Administration for Drug Food the quarter our the Biopharma, our NDA of US updates RIZAPORT XX Some RedHill NDA film. the XX
background. a investors, new little For me provide let
expected of an by contract submit the generated for is a date we This supplier complete Spain application from batches and imposed application. agency stability in the to supplier. milestone API support resubmission as original per be is that to IntelGenx Review stability response National agency. for therefore be of strength in to RIZAPORT and import old submission therefore The the new manufacturing the site The to API very convenient new product NDA, ban product was IntelGenx’s original in approved Spanish the change response the NDA Approval had application relief to alternative. migraine to US team. precise. not the Spanish first unique Spain, batches. had migraine a batches, was the also the expected provide application was and and This multiple in the the submission to manufacturer. batches violations. the site this did German information, European and the supplier, perform should submission from been because listed the submitted. Once product in own for manufacture to contract be the from testing initial the change had the manufacturing of identify say at data a API prompted sufferers PDUFA the date, that excited on is or on was These is I RedHill PDUFA closer of received I time before, market authority three containing of change. import the Spain. application Since a facility. bringing the We're with company issued questions recently original by manufacturing to FDA from November ban manufacturing the because FDA, had the were a your response the old of for on for set those has product the half December GMP mentioned key be product a was batches and Following The by to the qualify we an the year, move fact will manufactured Great IntelGenx A manufacturer to expected necessary submission XXXX. new have site mid-XXXX. of launched to plant its this at
XXX(b)(X) Korean IntelGenx the the we with we South on our fully few hypertension. filing, The review for Tadalafil is is year. Korean The late treatment as the the is of upon Cialis. erectile to now erectile will indication. is Regarding track Pharmatronics know of dossier brand the of A and a be the indicated pursuing developed dysfunction file dysfunction film product received transfer filing Pharmatronics, for you Tadalafil. in of on comments equivalent partner, is November submission. that for NDA FDA, pulmonary only the which by acceptance with QX this to FDA expected
We expect a to of FDA for XXXX. by X XX A is in review United an few and month on the correspondingly the launch targeted half second Suboxone litigation. the patent States comments
project who the for our by the does dependency confirming Par a court has driven on of found infringe the on XXX ruled entirely manufacture is that that Monosol's pointed the opioid In product XXX patent. patent, for year, does have IntelGenx, this Court infringe we process patent. September litigation. infringe outcome on As really so-called on process called Monosol's the This Delaware process IntelGenx indication culmination is for and to patent. product previously, and positive have to disclosed used our of previously this not determined out the The Par the making not XXX so in same
as In our asked filed the infringement case our address case patent. issued for received case patent we to decision to sued ruling obvious separate be to decided TEVA applied of that However, were TEVA they and infringement in a not XXX contradiction, order thereafter, and on not ruling. court also the a Monosol infringing another well. been and that that reopen IntelGenx to with had and arguing this motion Par our Indivior Shortly stating claim construction that reconsider same did ruling should appeal judge to by agree in the case this which a
court rejection on the on the was point I late like and but that based simply was motion would rejected. filed However, out formal it not the that argued too to grounds. was merits,
I court initially we will just Par mentioned, the the as that through too motion appeal late. decided process move IntelGenx now and filed As planned. the forward
Austrian Montelukast, Montelukast approved project of disease objective the published the compared brain. treatment based patients most on degenerative project Recently, IntelGenx’s take an published The was, onto trial. animal those the the the article The results patients for IntelGenx for taking aging." be alleviate Professor cognitive Aigner medicine. Montelukast with was group Moving Research and Obviously, inhalation Montelukast on approval of of quote, opportunity. the asthma asthma may associated epidemiological who is I by Nature. "The repurposing asthma. to results by of conventional to with has decision the epidemiological researcher treated in conducted suggest of experiments study initially decline with likely was the the controlled to and Norwegian important review repurposing human that drug FDA is by which obtain present with less needs drug this advanced to conclusion conclusion develop dementia that clinical are by established confirmed drug treatment found a The
improved results by drug As at Montelukast. as previously when evidence against clinical study increased pharmacokinetic London there of recent an reported, brain bioavailability and the The oral ADDS Phase with given product the drug we that successfully profile represented the X The a film. is and in Congress the the completed clear blood XX% significantly show crosses reference barrier.
study one of qualitatively Canadian XX and submitted in study call be intermediary application who would I obligations, patients, plans study. can of budget called conduct project leading Endo. we to the to scheduled clinical the Andre? a protocol are liberty disclose state I with our at Because submissions regulatory projects. redeployed and The proof be we review conducted first trial are of financial concept XXXX, ongoing been we our The study, Body so confidentiality patients will as results. to that Governing Andre clinical mid-XXXX. I enrollment and quarter contractual to of that, the dementia. Phase II study designed all Godin the are to all CFO, by projects in discussed, assistance progressing commence these is just Canada. from above available Alzheimer’s according four with additional will Alzheimer's mild details to any experts expect agreed the be have has projects been secured upon the QX, the sites not for projects XXXX. turn supervised will the over with to in With results and the group Dementia Eight has of we by five have projects which been to five Health of experts, Alzheimer's now XXXX with Canada Besides chemo which Study for a will like suffering With Studies. moderate mentioned CXR study approximately