If I understand your point, and that's a big IF, I don't agree with it.
Having just now thumbed through the relevant securities regulations I saw no mention of anything to the effect that "These Rules do not apply to pharmacological savants or their fellow executives".
So you can use that flimsy explanation for his failure to pay attention to the way HIS OWN background was described in half a dozen different documents at different times over a period of years, some of which carried his signature, but it doesn't excuse that failure.
It's just a weak argument when it comes to ONE'S OWN background information. I'm sure Kerala University is a fine school, no doubt he's proud of that degree, but it's not Harvard. Even a Savant should know that such a "mistake" would be perceived by some as a deception and not a slip of the pen, if not the first time then by the fourth or fifth. Next you'll be telling me he had to give away $30M worth of shares...half of his holdings...because he was too distracted to notice that he left somebody's name off a patent.
I'm sure he's a nice guy. And I'll bet no Big Pharma would care about his appearance....did Stephen Hawking's ideas get short shrift because he wasn't a vision of loveliness?
"I bought just over 5% of the shares traded today. It was so easy."
$6-7K. I'll bet it was easy...buy orders usually are.
"I will tell you anything you want to know about my ill-advised Prurisol post once results are announced."
Still safe. Maybe forever based on the 10-K:
"There can be no assurance when or whether the Company will receive the statistical data from the Phase 2b trial."
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
