Replies to post #2455 on Insmed Inc (INSM)

[zake1]

Windy, I am very interested in what you may ascertain.
I also thank you for taking the initiative to do this.
Maybe coinstar could facilitate the gathering of board
members to provide a source of funds to help you offset
your expense. I for one would be more than happy to chip
in. Be forwarned. What you're doing is displaying a level
of intelligence that is out of place with most investors.
On another note. I have posed this question to another
poster over at the YMB. Why is it TRCA virtually never
posts a 8k on any of these announcements? According to
Sarbanes Oxley, this is a requirement. We all note that
INSM does provide an 8k with each press release, as is
required. I have asked my broker how TRCA can ignore this,
and he feels they may be shielding themselves from class
action lawsuits simply because without an 8k, their statements
are not "official" in the eyes of the SEC.
regards.

[jellybean]

Zake and wind,

Slow down. Unless you find a patent attorney that is versed in biotech and familiar with expression stuff, you will waste your time and not come up with an answer different than what you hear on this board. Remember that even a patent lawyer will not be able to predict the decision a jury will make. This is a very complicated patent situation; licensed drug, licenses just to hurt another company, battling patents, prior art....the list goes on and on. That is one of the reasons why Insmed trades at such a low premium.

The biggest risk to Insmed right now is the '414 patent. Remember that it took Genentech how many years to actually get the patent issued, and that it was not allowed in Europe. This speaks to the ease of which a patent examiner was able to justify the patent in light of the prior art.

Also remember that summary judgements almost always fall to the plaintiff. There were a lot of conflicts raised in the judges opinion. Tercica might think that they will "win" if only one claim is upheld; but what will they win? That will depend upon the jury. Patents are designed to protect American's entrepeneurial spirit. What is entrepeneurial about suing a company with store bought IP thereby putting the better drug out of business?

In closing, I'll leave you with two references from the early 90's. Notice the keywords in the titles: IGF-1 secreted fusion protein E. coli. Kind of makes you wonder.


http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=1149562&pageindex=1

Biochem J. 1990 Oct 15;271(2):357-63.


Separation and characterization of modified variants of recombinant human insulin-like growth factor I derived from a fusion protein secreted from Escherichia coli.

So are these guys infringing also? Can you infringe retroactively?

Biochemistry. 1987 Aug 25;26(17):5239-44.

Expression of human insulin-like growth factor I in bacteria: use of optimized gene fusion vectors to facilitate protein purification.

[supacharja]

Windy...I understand your quest, but I think that would ultimately be money unwisely spent. I have a sizable position in INSM as well and have consulted with a few "patent" attorney friends on this matter. The bottom line is that there is more to this story than we are privy too. The only ones that "think" they fully understand this situation are the attorney's for the respective parties involved. And that is a misnomer because it appears that a jury (unless a deal is struck) will decide the issues at hand, which as you can imagine, can go either way.

Personally, my feeling is that regardless of the outcome, INSM will not be put "out of business." As such, the current valuation is ridiculously low and completely disregards the prospects of the entire pipeline as well as the IGFD indication (worldwide). I'm basing this notion off of public comps as well as private biotech M&A transactions.

Unfortunately (or fortunately for those that view the weakness as a buying op) this is not uncommon in the world of microcaps. Share prices tend to swing irrationally in both directions. Equilibrium will not be reached until there is more visibility. As a result, I would expect continued share price volatility in the intermediate term.