Insmed Inc (INSM)

[wjlknew]

Correction. The court ruled after the Markman Hearing that the "414" patent had been LITERALLY infringed, not the "151" patent as I stated. The ruling at the time on the "151" was that Insmed claimed unenforceability due to inequitable conduct, but failed to offer any evidence as proof of their claim ... only attorney argument which is not evidence. Therefore, the "151" patent was ruled valid after the Markman Hearing based on the evidence presented, or not presented.

The jury WAS instructed at trial to determine if the "151" had been infringed and, if so, was it willful. They decided both.

Insmed did eventually offer evidence (at trial I suppose) they believe will support their claim of inequitable conduct regarding the "151" patent. However, inequitable conduct is determined by the court, not the jury, so a hearing was held after the jury received the case, but before they brought in their verdict. If that is accurate, it explains why the inequitable conduct hearing was held AFTER the trial.

The remainder of my post is accurate ... I think. Sorry about that. Does anyone see it differently?