Ontvang nu dagelijks onze kooptips!

word abonnee
Van beleggers
voor beleggers
desktop iconMarkt Monitor
  • Word abonnee
  • Inloggen

    • Geen account? Registreren

    Wachtwoord vergeten?

BioPharma« Terug naar discussie overzicht

INSM - Insmed - Deel 11

1.161 Posts
Pagina: «« 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 59 »» | Laatste | Omlaag ↓
  1. [verwijderd] 14 december 2006 16:13
    quote:

    M.A.D.W. schreef:

    Je ziet nu dat ze precies andersom werken als de afgelopen dagen. Nu staat EDGX en NSDQ met grote biedblokken. Goed teken lijkt me.
    Sorry maar EDGX staat met grote orders zowel in de bied als laat op 95 en NSDQ staat zowel in de bied als laat met kleinere orders.
  2. [verwijderd] 14 december 2006 17:09
    quote:

    Henk Snaph schreef:

    We mogen niet vergeten dat morgen de short-posities bekend gemaakt moeten worden. Dit geldt voor alle fondsen!!!!!!

    Henk
    boeit ze niet met INSM, plenty tijd om te coveren
    zeker als ze zoals vandaag netjes naar beneden kunnen houden, downtrend nog niet gebroken
  3. [verwijderd] 14 december 2006 17:13
    nieuwe trial documents
    oa

    GENENTECH, INC. ET AL,
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    INSMED INCORPORATED,
    Defendant.
    NO. 04-05429CW
    MINUTE ORDER
    Date: 12/7/06
    The Honorable Claudia Wilken, Presiding
    Clerk: Sheilah Cahill Court Reporter: Diane Skillman
    Appearances for Plaintiff:
    Terry McMcMahon, William Gaede, Patricia Thayer; David Larson
    Appearances for Defendant:
    Henry Bunsow; David Bilkser; Larry Schlatzer
    Status Conference Held?: Yes
    Notes: Plaintiffs to file single brief on all post trial motions
    by 12/22/06; Defendant to file affirmative motions and response
    to plaintiff’s motions by 1/19/07; plaintiff reply due 1/26/07;
    defendant’s surreply due 2/2/07; Hearing on motions set for
    2/16/06 at 10:00 a.m. Parties to try to work out agreed upon
    discovery or Court will refer them to EMC if can’t agree on
    expert report to come in with briefing.
  4. Henk Snaph 14 december 2006 17:18
    quote:

    crackedtooth schreef:

    nieuwe trial documents
    oa

    GENENTECH, INC. ET AL,
    Plaintiff,
    v.
    INSMED INCORPORATED,
    Defendant.
    NO. 04-05429CW
    MINUTE ORDER
    Date: 12/7/06
    The Honorable Claudia Wilken, Presiding
    Clerk: Sheilah Cahill Court Reporter: Diane Skillman
    Appearances for Plaintiff:
    Terry McMcMahon, William Gaede, Patricia Thayer; David Larson
    Appearances for Defendant:
    Henry Bunsow; David Bilkser; Larry Schlatzer
    Status Conference Held?: Yes
    Notes: Plaintiffs to file single brief on all post trial motions
    by 12/22/06; Defendant to file affirmative motions and response
    to plaintiff’s motions by 1/19/07; plaintiff reply due 1/26/07;
    defendant’s surreply due 2/2/07; Hearing on motions set for
    2/16/06 at 10:00 a.m. Parties to try to work out agreed upon
    discovery or Court will refer them to EMC if can’t agree on
    expert report to come in with briefing.
    Crack, op 2-2-07 moet er al een emissie geweest zijn, of minstens bekend gemaakt zijn. Dit wordt m.i. juist het hete hangijzer bij INSM.

    Henk
  5. [verwijderd] 14 december 2006 17:18
    En lees 1013 ook eens.. INSM toelichting..interessant

    INSMED’S ALLEGATIONS ARE SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE
    Plaintiffs’ argument that Insmed did not properly allege inequitable conduct is simply false.
    Insmed properly asserted inequitable conduct alleging, inter alia, that Dr. Clark was under a duty of
    candor to the PTO, and withheld material information—Growth Regulation paper Study 51—from the
    PTO in violation of that duty. The particular facts about which Plaintiffs complain are not new bases of
    inequitable conduct; rather, they further demonstrate that Study 5 was material.
    Genentech repeatedly argued to the PTO that the complex of IGF-I/IGFBP-3 provided greater
    anabolic growth compared to IGF-I when given by subcutaneous injection to obtain the ’151 patent.
    Genentech compared two studies disclosed in the patent, an infusion experiment and a subcutaneous
    injection experiment. The disclosed 7-day infusion study demonstrated greater growth by
    administration of IGF-I alone after the third day of the experiment. Genentech relied on the day 5
    results to form the comparison with the subcutaneous injection experiment that was only conducted for
    3 days. The undisclosed experiment is relevant to materiality, in part, because undisclosed Study 5,
    which tested the complex by subcutaneous injection for longer than 3 days, showed at best, equivalent
    growth with IGF-I alone. Thus, the result of undisclosed Study 5 is directly contrary to the disclosed
    results and is contrary to the arguments relied upon in support of the patentability of the claims.2
  6. [verwijderd] 14 december 2006 17:59
    quote:

    crackedtooth schreef:

    [quote=Henk Snaph]
    [quote=crackedtooth]
    waarom moet er op 2/2/07 emissie zijn geweest henk?

    [/quote]

    Omdat niet veel later het geld op is!!!

    Henk
    [/quote]

    ik verwacht dat ze het OF over trial heentrillenm..
    maar nog waarschijnlijker dat ze het doen na de MMD/HARD updates

    Of een partner uit europa of uit Azië. Alles is mogelijk op dit moment.
1.161 Posts
Pagina: «« 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 ... 59 »» | Laatste |Omhoog ↑