marjac, I will be looking forward to Hamoa, North's, yours and others reviews. I find the defendants briefs very fragmented. When they cite testimony, much of the time it's only a word of two of a quote from say Budoff, and they fill in the rest. I will keep it real simple as I am not a lawyer, never mind one specializing in patents. Dr. Manku carries the day on obviousness and the judge seemed to buy into the theory that chronic conditions require indefinite treatment...which nothing put forth by the defendants changes. What is your view?
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
