Insmed Inc (INSM)

[Christiaan F]

It's clear that some parties DO know more! Was wondering why the 'unfair practice' trial was postponed till 2007, two weeks ago.

Guess that the answer is becoming more and more clear! DNA is preparing a nice deal (including settlement) with INSM, in order to stay ahead of the competition (GSK & NVA).

Any NEGATIVE publication(s) about a lost trial (for TRCA/DNA), would raise the pps for INSM instantly!

(reminder: The Federal Circuit reversed. The court held that three requirements must be met before a non-inventor's recognition of the utility of an invention can inure to the benefit of an inventor. "First, the inventor must have conceived the invention. Second, the inventor must have had an expectation that the embodiment tested would work for the intended purpose of the invention. Third, the inventor must have submitted the embodiment for testing for the intended purpose of the invention." Since Genentech did not submit the fusion protein to the outside consultant for the purpose of determining whether it promoted growth, the three requirements were not met, and the consultant's recognition of utility did not inure to Genentech's benefit.)