I see a slightly different scenario DWP.
It appears to me that BioCogniSafe is the "applicant" I believe of the patent applications that I have seen, with Bruno listed as the inventor.
Generally in those cases, the inventor if not the applicant in name, was or is in the employ of the applicant of the technology ( in this case possibly a partner).
That's why I believe the injunction was levied initially, and surely will have to be debated.
Bottom line, I believe the "applicant" noted on the patents will end up being the true owner of the intellectual property of the technology and Mr. Bruno (while receiving mention), will have only that. If Mr. Bruno was smart, he may have had a royalty agreement with BioCogni or as is noted also had ownership in BIO.
Interesting conundrum none-the-less. It also appears that Luc had a successful history and I would assume funding for R&D may have come from him as well.
I am doubtful that Monday will clear this up, with exception of possibly RH making comment that their attornies have a good feeling or case they believe.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
