Intellect Neurosciences Inc. (fka ILNS)

[wEaReLeGiOn]

I'm afraid that certainly isn't what the court "is saying" because all we've seen are pleadings, therefore that would be impossible. Oing specifically mentions upon more than one occasion, that certain matters brought up by council(s) are beyond and into "the meat" of the actual case.

Perhaps it would be helpful for people to read the proceedings in their entirety, and understand that when the judge makes comments, he's attempting to clarify the defendant's and the plaintiff's statements, respectfully.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/198776077/Intellect-Neurosciences-Inc-vs-Pfizer-Inc-Doc-90

INTELLECT's reply,

http://www.scribd.com/doc/209872336/Intellect-Neurosciences-v-Pfizer-Doc-107-Filed-28-Feb-14

The way I read what the court is saying, a patent was issued, it triggered a milestone and it should have been paid.