MoMoIsn't OSTE already winning this case ? I guess the gamble is whether or not they can get this ruling overturned? Isn't it harder to get a ruling overturned than to win initial case?
I think they also need financing, less than $2M left at end of June quarter.
I noticed yesterday that HSBC had sold @ 500k in am @ $0.27, why? It wasn't until a newsstory came out around noon that daytraders jumped all over it and volume shot up @ 2M shares in an hour. Maybe some more pop in it today, don't get left holding the bag.
Osteotech Announces Favorable Ruling by the United States Court of Appeals For The Federal Circuit in Its Patent Suit Against GenSci
10:42 EDT Wednesday, May 16, 2001
EATONTOWN, N.J., May 16 /PRNewswire/ -- Osteotech, Inc. (Nasdaq: OSTE)
announced today that the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit has denied GenSci's petition for writ of mandamus. In its petition,
GenSci sought to have the Federal Circuit direct the United States District
Court for the Central District of California to vacate its March 22, 2001
order denying GenSci's motion to withdraw its admissions that DynaGraft is
osteogenic (osteoinductive), and that DynaGraft contains new bone
growth-inducing amounts of demineralized osteogenic bone powder. In denying
GenSci's petition, the Court of Appeals held that the District Court did not
abuse its discretion in refusing to allow GenSci to withdraw its admissions
because GenSci continued to represent to both the Court and the public that it
believes the DynaGraft products are osteogenic (osteoinductive).
In January of this year, Osteotech filed a motion for summary judgment of
literal infringement of claims 4 and 10 of Osteotech's U.S. Patent No.
5,290,558, or the '558 Patent, which the District Court granted in April 2001.
Osteotech's motion was based on the District Court's ruling in December 2000
in which it construed the claims of the '558 Patent in a manner favorable to
Osteotech. GenSci's petition of mandamus also asked that the Court of Appeals
review and reverse the District Court's ruling granting Osteotech's motion of
summary judgment. In its ruling, the Court of Appeals declined to review the
merits of the District Court's claim construction and summary judgment order
in the context of the mandamus petition.
"We are pleased with the Court of Appeals ruling denying GenSci's petition
of mandamus and look forward to the upcoming trial," stated Richard W. Bauer,
Osteotech's Chief Executive Officer. "We continue to find it ironic, as
apparently does the Court, that GenSci would seek to withdraw its admissions
that their products are osteogenic (osteoinductive) while telling the Court
and the public at the same time that their products are osteogenic
(osteoinductive). We remain confident that our positions will be upheld at
the upcoming trial."
Given the high level of interest in this case among Osteotech's
shareholders, a copy of the Court of Appeals ruling is available through
Osteotech's Investor Relations Department.
This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding
Osteotech's current expectation as to the outcome of this lawsuit. Such
forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including
without limitation the risks inherent in patent litigation and other factors
detailed from time to time in the Company's periodic reports (including the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000, and the Form
10Q for the first quarter of 2001) filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Actual outcomes could differ materially from those expressed.
Osteotech, Inc., headquartered in Eatontown, New Jersey, is a leading
provider of human bone and bone connective tissue for transplantation and an
innovator in the development and marketing of biomaterial and implant products
for musculoskeletal surgery.