Insmed Inc (INSM)

[wjlknew]

"When reading INSMs IC motion it's clear that some evidence for the motion was collected during the trial."

That is my impression also. That would explain why the IC hearing was scheduled after the case went to the jury. IC was not an issue officially before the court until the trial was ongoing. In fact, I seem to remember the judge making a statement to the effect that she did not want to stop the trial for an IC hearing because she was afraid that might prejudice the jury on the other issues, but I may have dreamed that.

Also, I get the impression the judge made bringing up the subject of IC as difficult as possible. (She had already ruled on the prior art question, and bringing up IC was in effect exposing her decision to further examination.)

The U.S. legal system really IS counterintuitive. Years ago in Denmark I was asked by a police official there to explain our Criminal Justice System so that he could understand the logic behind why we do what we do. I couldn't. My suspicion is that our founding fathers would be shocked today if they could see how the system has evolved ... with lawyers running the show.