jschembs Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I'm stealing this idea from other smarter micro cap guys, but RVP has been embroiled in a legal tussle with Becton Dickinson for years over BDX's alleged monopolization and false advertising within a segment of the syringe market. The courts have awarded RVP between $400-450 million ($340.5 mm in trebled damages, $11.7 mm in attorneys fees, and both pre and post-judgement interest, which is likely in the $50 mm + neighborhood). Further, BDX has a pending injunction forcing them to notify ALL customers and other relevant parties of their improper advertising claims, which they have repeatedly sought to appeal/postpone (they have already taken a $341 mm charge for the primary monetary charge). Feb 14 is the current "drop dead" date for the injunction to move forward. So, seems we have some catalysts from a legal perspective. From a financial perspective, RVP should receive in excess of $400 mm. The company currently has 27.5 mm shares outstanding with a $4.63 price (127 mm market cap) less approximately $19 mm in net cash - EV of $108 mm. Seems like a reasonable risk/reward. Obviously the risks are continued legal battles delaying receipt of cash, or (longer term) RVP's management team hoarding that cash in an attempt to rebuild their business (RVP has roughly broken even from an operating cash flow perspective over the last two years, on approximately $30 mm in revenue). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Chris Demuth has written some really good articles on RVP, worth reading... http://seekingalpha.com/article/2773105-chris-demuth-jr-positions-for-2015-banking-m-and-a-milestone-payments-litigation-results Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcliu Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is there a reason for the large increase today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 There are some posts on Yahoo! that BDX lost another appeal to RVP. Don't know how many times this has been already for BDX. I think just to save face, they should use the $340M on their loss reserves and buy up RVP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 Is there a reason for the large increase today? Appellate court denied BDX's motion to stay the injunction. Regarding brke_guy's comment, what does that mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 So, it means that unless BDX has another appeal plan in place, they should consider coming to the negotiation table with RVP or the injunction deadline will kick in on Feb. 14th. I don't think the court would give BDX another extension. Time is up for BDX, I think... I just saw this new PR from RVP: http://www.b2i.us/profiles/investor/NewsPrint.asp?b=577&ID=74829&m=rl&pop=1&Nav=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 So, it means that unless BDX has another appeal plan in place, they should consider coming to the negotiation table with RVP or the injunction deadline will kick in on Feb. 14th. I don't think the court would give BDX another extension. Time is up for BDX, I think... I just saw this new PR from RVP: http://www.b2i.us/profiles/investor/NewsPrint.asp?b=577&ID=74829&m=rl&pop=1&Nav=1 Yesterday's ruling came from the appellate court, whereas the earlier ones were from the district court. I'm a legal neophyte, but I'd agree BDX's options appear to be running out. Using their loss reserve to buy RVP doesn't make any sense though - that's an existing expense, and a sunk cost. Pure speculation here, but my sense is the blood is so bad b/w the two parties that an acquisition is unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tytthus Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Since this is a class action lawsuit, brought by Retractable, et al, should we assume there are other parties in line to collect part of the ~$350 million? How much of the final payments might be claimed by lawyers? RVP seems mispriced even if the answers to the above are "a lot". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 I'm not a lawyer or legal expert, but I've done pretty well with a handful of legal event driven trades before -- so I could be totally wrong... But my understanding is that BDX can still appeal. What they lost yesterday was the ability to extend the stay (that allowed them to not yet notify their customers regarding fals advertising, etc.) The main thesis here is that BDX will be so concerned with saving face/PR issues, they will happily pay out $300-$400MM. Basically, if BDX is not mortified by this, I expect them to continue the appeals process. If there is a settlement, I expect that it will be LESS than the $350MM + fees. I wonder if they have a settlement, whether RVP will be able to negotiate a licensing agreement with BDX for their technology. What do you guys think the company will do with the cash -- this is what would worry me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 I'm not a lawyer or legal expert, but I've done pretty well with a handful of legal event driven trades before -- so I could be totally wrong... But my understanding is that BDX can still appeal. What they lost yesterday was the ability to extend the stay (that allowed them to not yet notify their customers regarding fals advertising, etc.) The main thesis here is that BDX will be so concerned with saving face/PR issues, they will happily pay out $300-$400MM. Basically, if BDX is not mortified by this, I expect them to continue the appeals process. If there is a settlement, I expect that it will be LESS than the $350MM + fees. I wonder if they have a settlement, whether RVP will be able to negotiate a licensing agreement with BDX for their technology. What do you guys think the company will do with the cash -- this is what would worry me. Right, I don't think they're out of appeal options, but they've consistently been rebuffed. I agree with your worry re what the company does with the cash. I imagine Shaw is so frustrated with BDX he could decide to plow much of the cash into a fight to regain market share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Does Retractable's law firm take a third of any eventual award? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcliu Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Doesn't the injunction require payment of damages as well? So unless they can appeal this before Feb 14, RVP will still collect the amount awarded right? I have no clue.. Any law experts here that can offer some insight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted February 16, 2015 Share Posted February 16, 2015 http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/gpo-notice.pdf http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/distributor-notice.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/gpo-notice.pdf http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/distributor-notice.pdf BDX digging in. Basically busts the thesis that BDX finds the PR hit to be worse than the financial hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted February 17, 2015 Author Share Posted February 17, 2015 http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/gpo-notice.pdf http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/distributor-notice.pdf BDX digging in. Basically busts the thesis that BDX finds the PR hit to be worse than the financial hit. Yep, certainly disappointing. Do they really think they can get the damage suit overturned? That seems to be the only point of continuing to stall at this point. However, their last salvo was only to argue against the pre-judgment interest, which is a much less meaningful (but still significant) financial repercussion (and one for which they haven't already recorded a charge, unlike the $341 mm). It's still worth taking a step back - the co is trading at roughly 1/3 of the damage award (excluding any awards of legal fees and pre/post-judgment interest). This verdict came down (and was recorded by BDX as a charge) roughly 1.5 yrs ago. I continue to believe this is a good risk/reward for those willing to handle the volatility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krazeenyc Posted February 17, 2015 Share Posted February 17, 2015 http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/gpo-notice.pdf http://www.bd.com/hypodermic/injunction/distributor-notice.pdf BDX digging in. Basically busts the thesis that BDX finds the PR hit to be worse than the financial hit. Yep, certainly disappointing. Do they really think they can get the damage suit overturned? That seems to be the only point of continuing to stall at this point. However, their last salvo was only to argue against the pre-judgment interest, which is a much less meaningful (but still significant) financial repercussion (and one for which they haven't already recorded a charge, unlike the $341 mm). It's still worth taking a step back - the co is trading at roughly 1/3 of the damage award (excluding any awards of legal fees and pre/post-judgment interest). This verdict came down (and was recorded by BDX as a charge) roughly 1.5 yrs ago. I continue to believe this is a good risk/reward for those willing to handle the volatility. I think BDX's chances of winning an appeal or at least reducing the trebled damages definitely greater than 0 -- easily worth it for them to try. The Eastern District of Texas is so friendly to the plaintiffs in these IP cases. Any settlement would have to be significantly lower than the full amount b/c a settlement eliminates the risk of BDX winning in an appeal -- both sides know this. But it doesn't seem that a settlement is likely -- since it hasn't already occurred. But in reality, the biggest issue I have investing in RVP is -- what happens if they win? I doubt shareholders see a single penny via capital return... Any indication they're willing to dividend out $4-5 in cash if they get paid? They don't have much of an ongoing business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Looks like RVP just lost another appeal case: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/retractable-technologies-inc-announces-u-151800617.html Writ of Certiorari. A decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Looks like RVP just lost another appeal case: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/retractable-technologies-inc-announces-u-151800617.html Writ of Certiorari. A decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court. How do you figure? The Supreme Court denied BDX's request to review the appeal on the patent infringement award (not the larger antitrust award). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 My bad, jschembs. Let me restate that. I meant to say, "Looks like BDX just lost another case". Sorry for the typo. :D :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 My bad, jschembs. Let me restate that. I meant to say, "Looks like BDX just lost another case". Sorry for the typo. :D :D No problem! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brker_guy Posted April 22, 2015 Share Posted April 22, 2015 I am surprised that RVP didn't move up that much today. We barely nudged up... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jschembs Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 Wasn't really significant IMO. This relates to a separate patent infringement case - not the major antitrust case - where RVP was already awarded (and received in cash) a $7.7 mm judgement against BDX. RVP had booked the judgement as a liability until there was more certainty, as BDX intended to appeal. Assuming that means this case is put to rest, my non-CPA view is the $7.7 mm liability moves to equity as a non-cash, non-operating gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeeman Posted December 2, 2016 Share Posted December 2, 2016 Looks like RVP just lost another appeal case: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/retractable-technologies-inc-announces-u-151800617.html Writ of Certiorari. A decision by the Supreme Court to hear an appeal from a lower court. Looks like a prescient quote. RVP did lose the appeal case today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now