Be happy to explain. The analogy I have used in the past is that imagine I have a patent for square tires and I go out and sue Goodyear. Goodyear will claim in court that even if my patents for square tires are valid, they did not infringe because they make round tires. What has happened in the past is that the jury has ruled that even if the patents were valid, Reynolds does not infringe. That means that in a jury minds, valid patents are irrelevant.
With regards to the bigger fall, all I meant was that there will be a bigger drop in market cap. I think we can agree that the pumpers will use this even to pump up the price. Therefore, when we go back to trial assuming that higher rpice holds, the stock will drop further when in my opinion a jury once again rules that Reynolds did not infringe. This event today was an event created by the bulls. I don't even think Reynolds expected the SC to take the case. The only reason you appeal to the SC is because if by some miracle the SC takes the acse and you win, STSI can no longer sue Reynolds. Instead, what will happen is STSI will sue Reynolds again and if history holds, a jury will find Reynolds did not infringe. Though this new lawsuit will encompass a differnt time period than the last one. Of course, STSI will have to prove that Reynolds changed their curing process between time periods.
