Looking for a little clarification from the legal minds on the board.
Is the ruling today related to admission of the facts surrounding the revocation of the EU Patent for open court during proceedings or is this only available during the penalty phase when the parties are debating whether or not the infringement the jury may have already decided took place was willful or not? It sure seems to indicate that this information is being debated at this point so that when the time comes Insmed will have the ability to say something like "we have the following reasons we felt the patent was invalid". Does this ruling now give them the ability to argue that they had good reason to do what they did and that even if they did infringe, the penalty should not be excessive.
Let me know your thoughts. What do you think Zake?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
