Federal Judge Vaughn Walker

California federal courtroom for the first time.

Less than four weeks ago, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that it was time to begin a pilot project exploring the benefits of broadcasting federal civil trials.   It is somewhat remarkable that the long-protected privacy of California federal courtrooms would become negotiable just weeks before the start of the Proposition 8 discrimination trial.   The Ninth Circuit’s “pilot project” immediately opened the door for Federal Judge Vaughn Walker to take extraordinary legal steps, on New Year’s Eve no less,  to extend the project to include the discrimination suit against Protect Marriage.  With every day, the prosecution of Protect Marriage seems to be led, not just by formidable constitutional attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson, but by Judge Walker as well.  An outraged National Review Online columnist, Ed Whelan, notes that by waiting until New Year’s Eve to make procedural moves to broadcast the Proposition 8 discrimination trial, Judge Walker essentially precluded the public from having any opportunity to oppose it.  In a letter written directly to the Judge, Whelan publicly challenges the motives behind the move:

“The longstanding policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States opposes all broadcasting of civil and criminal cases in federal district courts.  The concerns that animate that policy—including the threat of intimidation of witnesses and litigants—are especially present in the Perry case, as the December 28, 2009, letter from counsel for Defendant-Intervenors makes clear.

I will not address here the curious announcement on December 17, 2009, of the Ninth Circuit’s pilot program.  Suffice it to say that the selection of cases for a pilot program ought to involve, at a minimum, addressing the following questions:

1.  Does any party object to televised proceedings?

2.  Is there any reason to believe that televised proceedings might increase the risk that trial participants would face intimidation, harassment, or abuse?

3.  Is there any reason to believe that that televised proceedings might create a risk that trial participants, including the judge, would engage in grandstanding behavior?

Only in cases in which the answer to all three questions is NO would it make sense to consider further the possibility of participation in the pilot program.  By contrast, in Perry, the answer to all three questions is YES.

I am aware that a coalition of media companies has asked you to have Perry televised because “televising this modern-day Scopes trial would present viewers with a national civics lesson on a hotly contested issue that crosses social, political, educational, and religious boundaries.”  But the role of the courts is not to “present viewers with a national civics lesson.”  It’s to decide cases fairly.  In some cases, that goal might be jeopardized by televising the proceedings.  But in other cases it will be.  The very fact that these media companies are intent on portraying the case as a “modern-day Scopes trial” reinforces the ample evidence that this trial should not be televised.  If you persist in failing to recognize that elementary fact, the national civics lesson that you will be providing is yet another reminder that too many of our federal judges willfully abuse their authority in order to advance their own political agendas.

If you proceed to rubber-stamp the proposed revision to Rule 77-3 in order to enable televised coverage of Perry, I respectfully submit that your reckless and prejudicial course of conduct on this matter will have clearly demonstrated that your “impartiality might reasonably be questioned” within the meaning of the judicial-disqualification law, 28 U.S.C. § 455(a), and that you will then be obligated to disqualify yourself from further participation in Perry.  Indeed, I invite you to examine dispassionately whether you are already required to disqualify yourself.”

Ed Whelan writes, what everyone is thinking.

Read more here as the National Review Online examines the strategy behind the federal court challenge of Prop 8.

Anyone with a television set in 1994 remembers the televised circus that was the O.J. Simpson trial.  Judge Ito’s courtroom became a circus and the trial a judicial farce.   Indeed, the public is fascinated with law and order. It is also true that some events in our society really do not bear the intrusion of video cameras.  Truth was distorted in the O.J. Simpson case, and certainly the majority of Americans feel the outcome was dreadfully impacted.

Even if the famous Bush vs. Gore Supreme Court case in 2000, where the outcome of a presidential election and the interests of every American was at stake, only audio broadcasts were allowed of the proceedings.

The Supreme Court, with Justice Steven Breyer dissenting, has for the present, protected the proceedings from becoming an even bigger media frenzy.

Before Google Maps or navigation systems, there were shepherds and there were stars.

In the Old World, shepherds knew the sky and the terrain like a well-worn map.   They were quite different from farmers of the time, who had the means to at least own land or to buy livestock.  Shepherds survived on meager wages earned by watching the flocks of others.  Even so, they were well-travelled and moved from pasture to pasture, hillside to hillside.  If there ever was a change in the sky, or a happening on the horizon, shepherds often would have been the first to see it, and likely the first to tell of it.

There has always been great poetry in the way Heavenly Father sent word of the Savior’s birth, dispatching a beautiful chorus of angels to proclaim it to lowly shepherds.  There was also a message in this method.  By breaking the news on the hillsides above Bethlehem where only shepherds dwelt, those shepherds would be the ones to have the privilege of announcing to many that the greatest shepherd of all had been born into the world.

Turning the pages of  the well-read passages in Luke,  it is also meaningful to note that the story of Christ’s birth is as much about what happened to shepherds that night, as what happened in the manger:

“And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.  And lo the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them and they were sore afraid.  And the angel said unto them “Fear not: for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.  And this shall be a sign unto you;  Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.  And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”

And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from them into heaven, the shepherds said one to another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known unto us.  And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger.

And when they had seen it, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this child.  And all they that heard it wondered at those things which were told them by the shepherds.  But Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her heart.  And the shepherds returned glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it was told unto them.

How marvelous to contemplate what it might have been like to see or hear of this greatest event in history.  Almost nothing we know of or have read since compares.  The scriptures give hints as to what the Second Coming of Christ might be like, and it is remarkable to try to imagine that.  Yet nothing in the history of the world compares with the simplicity and humility of the events surrounding the birth of Jesus Christ.

Today, two thousand years later, students gather to study the histories of the world in Jerusalem.  As part of their studies, students are sometimes taken to what is now known as “Shepherd’s Hill,” believed to be the site where angels appeared at the birth of Christ.  On one occasion, students there were ushered to the hillside overlooking Bethlehem.  They were surprised to find that it wasn’t at all what they expected.   Instead of a lovely, grassy, welcoming hillside like one might expect in a painting or impression of that night, it was a dry, desert-like hill, rough and terraced, covered with rocks and even thorny bushes.

Still, all of the students sat down, pulled out their journals and were encouraged to write as they looked over the historic horizon and pondered the events that happened there.   In addition to the quiet of this sacred site, they had been assured that they would be able to see shepherds on Shepherds Hill.  Indeed, after just a few minutes poor little shepherd boys appeared and came towards them,  their palms turned upward in hopes of receiving something from the tourists.  Even in modern times, the shepherd boys were dressed in rags.

One student wrote:

“A shepherd boy came towards me.   He was carrying a little lamb draped around his neck.  He, like the other boys, hoped we would give them money or treats.  He asked if I would like to hold the little sheep.  As I took the warm baby lamb in my arms, I began to feel the spirit of the shepherds in a way I had never done before.   Unlike Wise Men who came to see the Christ child bearing gifts, these humble, solitary shepherds had nothing to give except their devotion and their faith in the wondrous words they had heard.

“Just as shepherds stand watch while waiting for the darkness to pass,  the Savior was born to stand watch through long, dark, nights with us, despite the terrors and sometimes the hardships that this life can bring.

“He knows us, his sheep.  He is our shepherd.”

Those who truly reverence the life of Jesus Christ also understand that we are all shepherds.  In our homes, our churches, our communities we are all part of  sacred flocks who need direction, protection, and love.

It is the beauty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ that we are here to serve one another.

And so, we watch over those in need, those who anguish.  We provide a shoulder or a hand, or a round of applause when someone in the flock has a great victory.  We share the Sacrament with one another in our services.  We struggle to rise to new callings because even while we are learning, our service is important to someone.  Sometimes all we can do to show our love for the Savior and each other is to add our voices to a hymn and sing praises to God.

Still, every time we set down a casserole at someone’s doorstep, or put a child in our lap, aid a wayward teenager, teach a class, present a merit badge, or bestow an award on a young woman who might not have received it without us …

Surely, angels are singing somewhere.

There is only one headline, one directive that we have received in the last two thousand years that surpasses all others, and which if followed, would help us to rule the world:  “Glory to God in the highest, Peace on Earth, Goodwill to Men.”

If, as mortals, we could follow those messages and keep our sites set singly upon the glory of God, work for peace on earth, and extend goodwill to all men, all would be well.  At this Christmastime, may we find ways to re-dedicate ourselves to these simplest and most important of missions.

We are so blessed to know of, and to have a shepherd that we can trust.

Let us follow him.

“While shepherds careful vigil kept o’er lambs in fields of green.

The sky took on a brilliant glow and lit the grassy scene.

In dread they looked upon the star that rose anew that night.

Then angels came to calm their fears and tell of the heavenly light.

In word and song they shared the news of the babe who was their king.

They sang of peace and love and joy, and the good will he would bring.

The keepers of the flocks arose and followed the heavenly beam,

But not to gleaming palace walls as it would surely seem.

It led them to an earthen stall where cattle and goats were kept.

And in the manger soft and warm, the little Jesus slept.

Tears filled up their tired eyes and ran down wind burned cheeks.

They had found the promised one, for whom the world still seeks.

Though they were watchers of the flocks, tenders of lamb and ewe,

He was the keeper of God’s flock, HE was the shepherd true.”

— Sally Meyer

———————————-

Merry Christmas.

“The Tax Foundation reported last week that more than 143 million individual income tax returns were filed in 2007,

Tax Pain

and 46.6 million of those returns had a zero or negative tax liability, setting a new record for the number of “non-payers.” This group represented almost one out of every three tax returns filed in 2007 (32.6 percent, see chart above), and reflects tax filers whose exemptions, deductions, and credits wiped out any federal income taxes that would have been due. According to the Tax Foundation, every dollar withheld from the paychecks of the “non-payers” during the year was refunded, and in about half of the cases, substantial additional money was refunded to the tax filer. There were an additional 15 million people in 2007 who did not earn enough income to file a tax return, bringing the total number of Americans who paid no federal income taxes to more than 61 million, or 39 percent of the tax-eligible population (158 million including filers plus non-filers).”

Read the ugly details here.   Long…….sigh.

www.blog.american.com/?p=7951

Shriver on Today's Women

constant balancing act that is a reality for women who try, or need to be part of both worlds.

Maria Shriver is a good reporter and always has been.  Now she adds to her perspective, enormous life experience as a mother of four, a front row seat in political life, and eight years as a Governor’s wife touring the communities of California.

I highly encourage viewing her segments airing on the NBC Evening News, or Today, or MSNBC this week.  There is a lot to learn from her reports. It is valuable to know the source of the research as well.  The American Policy Institute, partnering with TIME Magazine, conducted polling of 3,413 people throughout the U.S.  Both men and women were polled in the study.   For your information, former Clinton aide, John Podesta, is the head of the American Policy Institute.  Scanning the initial findings, the results are telling.

The Shriver Report is  probably the most interesting survey about women completed since 1963, when President John F. Kennedy directed Eleanor Roosevelt to examine the standing of American women.   At that time only 10% of American families were headed by unmarried women.

Anyone can download the entire report at the American Policy Institute if they wish, and it is fascinating reading.  Here are some highlights:

1-Half of all families in the U.S. now require two breadwinners.

2-A woman is the primary breadwinner in 4 out of 10 American families today.

3-Half of all workers in America are women.

4-60% of all college degrees are being earned by women.

5-Half of all P.H.D.’s are being awarded to women.

6-40% of all women in the workforce are employed as managers or professionals.

7-80% of all the buying decisions in America are made by women.

8-350,000 women are now in the U.S. Military.

9-The number of women starting their own businesses has grown 23% in recent years.

10-The number of women starting their own businesses is growing twice as fast as men doing the same.

11-53 % of college graduates breastfeed their babies, while only 29 percent of high school graduates do so.

True North Readers should go to www.TodayShow.com and watch for yourself.  Some of the conclusions drawn by NBC producers about the findings in this report are probably more trendy than…true.  On Monday Shriver and Matt Lauer discussed how fathers and mothers are now virtually “interchangeable” at home, suggesting that families can be constructed in any way, shape or form, and have the same outcome.  I doubt that broad-based research would support that very “today” observation.

While it is true that men are spending comparatively more time in American households,  and many are doing outstanding jobs replacing Mom, where are the surveys asking children how much they miss their Mothers?   How often are they sent to school sick because it is impossible for them to stay home?  What kind of stress level exists in their homes and how often do they feel they have the benefit of their parents’ undivided attention?

These would be hard questions for me to answer honestly in my own house.

A study of children might be the next valuable step in looking at A Woman’s Nation, because women are still nature’s primary nurturers.  The Shriver Report reveals that only 30% of women now can be classified as “stay at home moms.”   In reading reports such as these,  mothers who are dedicating themselves to the raising of their children, and/or are fortunate enough to be able to do so, may feel like propeller planes from another age.

A truly interesting empirical study would be to compare the performances and emotional I.Q.  of  children from the same 3,413 homes measured by the TIME and American Policy Institute study.   It might be terribly helpful to new parents, growing families and ambitious parents, to understand how the emotional and mental maturity of children is truly impacted for better and for worse, when they come from busy two-career homes or one career homes, or from homes with stay at home moms and moms and dads balancing role reversals.

We know many men and women are buckling under the stress of the worlds they are  tackling each day.  What we truly need to measure is: Are our children buckling too?

While parents are spending more time away from home fighting for wages and exhausting themselves in the world of work, our children are growing up in a world that hardly resembles what their parents remember.  How families are adapting to the challenge of commuting,  increasing academic requirements, the reach and danger of the internet, the constant external pressures on child safety, policing the ever- present and invasive mass media, and balancing family time, family values, and family security, may be the true rubrics we should be using as we measure our success as working parents and breadwinners.

Let’s roll out those studies.

A WA

Making Peace

African American to sit in the White House.  It is odd that, according to CNN, the Nobel Committee closed nominations shortly after Obama was inaugurated.  His “peace” efforts were still wet ink droplets on the page at that time.

In any event, Barack Obama will give the money to charity, all $1.4 million of it, which after taxes will be something over $700,000.  Donating the balance to charity will shelter the remainder of his government salary this year!  Those are the realities.

Past Peace Prize recipients include Al Gore, Henry Kissenger, Jimmy Carter, and of course Martin Luther King.  I thought it might be interesting to remember the names and acts of women  who have been recognized with the Nobel Peace Prize .  Turns out there’s a lot of politics…..in peace.

Bertha Suttner – 1905

Suttner, Bertha (Gräfin Kinsky), Freifrau von (ber’tä, grāf’in kins’kē, frī’frou fun zoot’nur) [key], 1843–1914, Austrian novelist, known chiefly as an ardent pacifist. Her pacifist novel Die Waffen nieder (1889, tr. Lay Down Your Arms, 1892) had great social impact. Through her subsequent friendship with Alfred Nobel, she influenced him to establish the Nobel Prizes. She was the first woman awarded (1905) the Nobel Peace Prize.

Addams, Jane  – 1931

Addams, Jane, 1860–1935, American social worker, b. Cedarville, Ill., grad. Rockford College, 1881. In 1889, with Ellen Gates Starr, she founded Hull House in Chicago, one of the first social settlements in the United States (see settlement house). Based on the university settlements begun in England by Samuel Barnett, Hull House served as a community center for the neighborhood poor and later as a center for social reform activities. It was important in Chicago civic affairs and had an influence on the settlement movement throughout the country. An active reformer throughout her career, Jane Addams was a leader in the woman’s suffrage and pacifist (see pacifism) movements, and was a strong opponent of the Spanish-American War. She was the recipient (jointly with Nicholas Murray Butler) of the 1931 Nobel Peace Prize. Her books on social questions include The Spirit of Youth and the City Streets (1909), A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil (1912), and Peace and Bread in Time of War (1922).

(2005); studies by D. Levine (1971) and J. B. Elshtain (2001).

Emily Greene Balch – 1946

Balch, Emily Greene (bolch) [key], 1867–1961, American economist and sociologist, b. Jamaica Plain, Mass., grad. Bryn Mawr, 1889. She taught at Wellesley College until her dismissal (1918) for opposing U.S. involvement in World War I. Co-founder of the Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom with Jane Addams and its international secretary from 1919 to 1922, she shared with John R. Mott the 1946 Nobel Peace Prize.

Mairead Corrigan – 1976

Corrigan, Mairead (moi’ru kôr’igun) [key], 1944–, Irish social activist, b. Belfast. A volunteer social worker in the Catholic neighborhoods of Belfast, Corrigan saw three of her sister’s children killed when a car driven by an Irish Republican Army (IRA) terrorist went out of control after being fired on by British troops. Betty Williams, who also witnessed the incident, joined with Corrigan to form the Peace People Organization, a movement of Catholics and Protestants dedicated to ending sectarian fighting in Northern Ireland. For their work the two women were awarded the 1976 Nobel Peace Prize.

Mother Teresa – 1979

Teresa, Mother, 1910–97, Roman Catholic missionary in India, winner of the 1979 Nobel Peace Prize, b. Skopje (now in Macedonia) as Agnes Goxha Bojaxhiu. Of Albanian parentage, she went to India at 17, becoming a nun and teaching school in Calcutta (now Kolkata). In 1948 she left the convent and founded the Missionaries of Charity, which now operates schools, hospitals, orphanages, and food centers worldwide. She was beatified by Pope John Paul II in 2003.

See her writings in In My Own Words (1996, comp. by J. L. González-Balado) and her letters in Come Be My Light (2007, ed. by B. Kolodiejchuk).

Alva Myrdal – 1982

Myrdal, Alva (äl’vä mir’däl, Swed. mür’däl) [key], 1902–86, Swedish sociologist, diplomat, and political leader. As a sociologist in the 1930s, she initiated a national program establishing state responsibility for child care. She actively participated in the United Nations as head of the department of social welfare (1949–50) and as director of the department of social sciences of UNESCO (1950–56). She was ambassador (1955–61) to India, Burma (now Myanmar), Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), and Nepal. After she served as a member of Sweden’s parliament (1962–70), she led Sweden’s delegation to the UN Disarmament Conference in Geneva (1962–73) and was minister of disarmament and church affairs (1967–73). For her work in the nuclear disarmament movement, she won the 1982 Nobel Peace Prize. Her writings include The Game of Disarmament (1976) and War, Weapons and Everyday Violence (1977). She was married to Gunnar Myrdal.

Aung San Suu Kyi  – 1991

Aung San Suu Kyi (äN săn sOO chē) [key], 1945–, Burmese political leader; grad. Oxford Univ. The daughter of assassinated (1947) nationalist general U Aung San, who is regarded as the founder of modern Myanmar, she lived outside the country after 1960. Returning in 1988 to care for her dying mother, she joined the opposition to U Ne Win and became leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD). Her outspoken criticism of the military leaders of Myanmar and the memory of her father made her a symbol of popular desire for political freedom and a focus of opposition to the dictatorship. In July, 1989, she was placed under house arrest. The NLD won 80% of the seats in 1990 elections for parliament, but the military refused to yield power. Awarded the 1990 Sakharov Prize from the European Parliament and the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize for her nonviolent struggle, she remained under house arrest until 1995 and was subsequently subject to severe restrictions. Nonetheless, she has stayed in Myanmar, continuing to write and speak for her cause. She subsequently has been placed in house arrest or detention from Sept., 2000 to May, 2002, and since May, 2003.

Rigoberta Menchú – 1992

Menchú, Rigoberta (rē”gōber’tä menchOO‘) [key], 1959–, Guatemalan social reformer. Of Mayan descent, she and her family were caught in Guatemala’s bloody civil war. Protesters against human-rights abuses, her father, mother, and younger brother were killed by Guatamalan soldiers, and in 1981 Menchú fled the country and settled in Mexico. At home and abroad, she has worked to secure and protect the rights of indigenous peoples in her country and to promote intercultural peace. For her efforts, Menchú was awarded the 1992 Nobel Peace Prize. In 1998 her autobiographical I, Rigoberta Menchú (1983) was attacked as partly fabricated, provoking international controversy. Menchú was candidate for the Guatemalan presidency in 2007, but won only 3% of the vote.

The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2007, Columbia University Press. All ri

Shirin Ebadi – 2003

Lawyer / Activist

Shirin Ebadin won the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize for her work promoting the rights of women and children in her home country of Iran. Ebadi studied at Tehran University, graduating with a law degree in 1971, and was named Iran’s first-ever female judge in 1975. However, she and other female judges were forced to resign when Iran became an Islamic Republic after the revolution of 1979. After years of being denied a law license, Ebadi set up her own legal practice in 1992 and quickly developed a special interest the rights of women, journalists, and others who lacked power under the Iranian regime. She co-founded the Association for Support of Children’s Rights (in 1995) and the Human Rights Defense Center (in 2001) and became known outside Iran for her clashes with the country’s ruling clerics. The 2003 announcement from the Nobel Committee praised Ebadi for “her efforts for democracy and human rights” and said “She has stood up as a sound professional, a courageous person, and has never heeded the threats to her own safety.” Her books include The Rights of the Child (1993), Tradition and Modernity (1995) and The Rights of Women (2002).

Chemotherpay at Duke Cancer Clinic

This article in today’s Salt Lake City Deseret News is so vital and informational to those who have or who are or who will confront Cancer in their families, that True North takes the opportunity to excerpt it here and thanks writer Lois M. Collins for her great piece and for spreading the news of the work of Massachusetts firm,  Merrimack Pharmaceuticals, for their innovatoins in Cancer research.

FIRM TAKES ENGINEERING APPROACH TO TREATING CANCER

A Massachusetts company with strong Utah ties is approaching the finding and fixing of cancerous tumors as an engineering challenge. It believes most solid tumors are triggered by one or more of six distinct systemic signaling-mechanism breakdowns and it’s developing treatments to repair them.

Merrimack Pharmaceuticals of Cambridge, Mass., on Thursday announced a $530 million exclusive worldwide licensing agreement with French pharmaceutical giant sanofi-aventis for the development and co-commercialization of a drug targeting the first of those

signaling breakdowns.

Chemotherapy Drugs

Developing drugs to treat diseases including cancer often involves throwing every compound you can think of at it to see what elicits the response you want, says Utahn Gary Crocker, chairman of Merrimack Pharmaceuticals and president of Utah’s Crocker Ventures LLC. But with new technologies that make it easier to look inside cells and see how they “cross talk,” Merrimack decided to view cancer as an engineering problem with an engineered solution. Merrimack uses network biology, which is a combination of computer modeling and efficient analysis of cell signaling networks.

Once you identify the breakdown in the signaling mechanism, it’s possible to engineer a diagnostic test and a fix, he told the Deseret News.

The company has confirmed five critical signaling networks where a breakdown can trigger cancer in different organ tissues. A sixth has been found but not yet confirmed, he said. Merrimack estimates the identified mechanical breakdowns are linked to at least 90 percent of solid tumors. That means the same problem may have occurred in a case of breast cancer and of prostate cancer although distinctly different organs are involved. And the treatment may be the same in both cases, too — a dramatic departure from a traditional chemotherapeutic approach.

“The goal is not to just kill cancer cells, but to actually fix the engineering breakdown that created the cancer,” Crocker said.

Merrimack is in early clinical trials with compounds that target some of the identified mechanism breakdowns. It’s a process being watched closely in Utah, as Beehive State investors hold about 10 percent of the company’s shares, including Crocker, a successful Utah businessman.

Additionally, Merrimack plans to move some of its research to the University of Utah College of Science, which has one of the nation’s top math biology programs. And the phase 2 clinical trials are likely to include Huntsman Cancer Institute, Crocker said.

Under the agreement, sanofi-aventis will pay $60 million cash and will cover all the development costs. The rest of the funding will be paid in chunks as various regulatory and sales milestones are met, said Kathleen Petrozzelli, Merrimack associate director of corporate communications. The company retains the right to co-promote the drug in the United States. The agreement covers only the drug MM-121, a first of its kind, fully human monoclonal antibody that blocks signaling at one of the identified breakdown sites. Once phase 2 “proof of concept” is established, sanofi-aventis will take over development.

The agreement still has to clear antitrust and regulatory reviews.