Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical

Yes OA is C.
For mentioned reasons and also for other reasons such as:
A is wrong: because is a wrong conjunction.
B is wrong : subject verb agreement issue, that noun clause is singular and the verb used is "do not"
D is wrong : The modifier "when securing..."modifies competitors and alters meaning.
E is wrong : The use of pronoun "this" is incorrect.

C or D.

But I do not like C because of "two" and D because of "such as".

What is OA?

I will try to use 'Clarity' to attack this question.

(A) Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical compound, the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals have at least one structural difference with the patented compound.
Because a manufacturer does X, X does not...sounds in correct, since the first one is a dependent clause. It should be "Because a manufacturer does X, it (manufacturer) does not.... Also there are pronoun issues 'chemicals like IT', and 'THOSE chemicals'.
(B) That a manufacturer has secured a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds do not bar competitors from producing similar chemicals and having at least one important difference from the patented compound
S-V issue
(C) A patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like the patented compound, as long as the two differ structurally in at least one way
(D) When securing a patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds, competitors are not barred from the production of chemicals such as the patented compound, provided that there is at least one structural difference
This states an action, "when securing a patent". An action of the manufacturer does not bar competitors, but it's the result of the action that bars competitors.
(E) Even if a manufacturer secures a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds, this does not bar competitors from the production of a chemical such as the patented compound, but having at least one structural difference from it
Pronoun issue

Let me know what you make of this.

hi Harshap. confused on this one. thought A was the right answer despite the 'because' at the starting because of the intented meaning which was:

Patents are granted on pharma.. compounds and not on chemicals. hence a manufacturer holding a patent cannot bar a competitor if the competitor can prove that his/her chemical has atleast one structural difference.

on the looks of it, i had eliminated C and D because of the possessive i.e., manufacturer's ph...compound that i felt restructured the meaning differently.

B - felt awkward E - such that is incorrectly used.

so i guess question is why C and not A?

The sentence construction is such that, it tries to explain the limitation of patent protection. Author says, the manufacturer secures patent, but patent does not bar...i.e. because manufacturer does X, X does not
the construction is not as you deciphered , because manufacturer does x, manufacturer does not....
the patent can not bar something (patent limitation), is not a result of manufacturer's securing patent.

Hope this helps.

Hi harshap, afraid I don't follow. Having a patent clearly bars competitors from using the same chemicals. Though I understand now why C could be correct, I feel that A is wrong now because the statement would have been better if it started with "Just because..." Instead of "Because..."

Posted from my mobile device

Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical compound, the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals have at least one structural difference with the patented compound.

a)Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical compound, the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals have at least one structural difference with the patented compound

b)That a manufacturer has secured a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds do not bar competitors from producing similar chemicals and having at least one important difference from the patented compound

c)A patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like the patented compound, as long as the two differ structurally in at least one way

d)When securing a patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds, competitors are not barred from the production of chemicals such as the patented compound, provided that there is at least one structural difference

e)Even if a manufacturer secures a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds, this does not bar competitors from the production of a chemical such as the patented compound, but having at least one structural difference from it

OA

B-use of that is not correct.
D-change the meaning.
E- use of It is ambigous
Between A&C I will go for C as it is concise and gives clear meaning.

IMO A.

As you said i went with meaning for this question

Because represents contrast....
i guess B D E doesnt produce any contrast.

C gives the intended meaning without contrast word. (seems to be right)

pls correct me if im wrong

Why do you think a contrast is needed here?
Consider this example.
Because India has a prime minister who is Sikh, it doesn't bars a person of other religion to become the prime minister of India.
Does the above example requires contrast?

Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical compound, the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals have at least one structural difference with the patented compound.

a)Because a manufacturer secures a patent for a pharmaceutical compound, the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals have at least one structural difference with the patented compound pronoun ambiguity

b)That a manufacturer has secured a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds do not bar competitors from producing similar chemicals and having at least one important difference from the patented compound incorrect usage of having

c)A patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like the patented compound, as long as the two differ structurally in at least one way correct

d)When securing a patent for one of a manufacturer’s pharmaceutical compounds, competitors are not barred from the production of chemicals such as the patented compound, provided that there is at least one structural difference who is secures the patent - manufacturers or competitors..it says competitors - incorrect

e)Even if a manufacturer secures a patent for one of its pharmaceutical compounds, this does not bar competitors from the production of a chemical such as the patented compound, but having at least one structural difference from it incorrect usage of having

A looks good to me except that it switched from "a chemical like it"to a plural "those chemicals"
The "Because..." phrase provides a subordinate clause and a reason why the "patent" does not bar other competitors
from producing a similar chemical. The use of "such as" is wrong because we don't expect other companies to produce the
SAME chemical that has already been patented and without any license to do that.

C: after a pause for the referent of "the TWO differ structurally ", i think the meaning is clear and grammatically sound.

Because A , B happens , as long as C occurs. This is the format of the given Question.
From seeing the options given . B , D , E gets eliminated Becoz of change in meaning.
Im stuck with A & C. I dunno wat s the answer.
I believe its time to give the correct OA atleast after a couple of weeks.

B is wrong not because of the use of That-clause
In fact, in MGMAT SC 4th ed, the GMAT prefers a That-clause (with verbs) to a series of phrases (with nouns). As a poster here has pointed out, the "that-clause" requires a singular verb; therefore, "do not bar" is wrong.

I think the use of structure "Because X, Y" makes answer choice (A) wrong. The intended meaning of the original problem is not about the cause-effect relation; it just means that a patent for a product does not prevent other producer from making similar product.

My answer is (C)

the answer is C ....

Choice A -> the patent does not bar competitors from producing a chemical like it, as long as those chemicals....

it" is ambiguous;
"difference with" is unidiomatic.
Agreement error between the 2 boldface.

Cheers

Yeah.
Its time to post the OA.
OA is C.

Doesn't one of a manufacturer's compound sound weird when u speak?