Personally, I think we would be a lot better off if we signed a license agreement with Valensa regarding all FUTURE claims about eye health ...... and then just not make those claims anymore. As it stands now, it is a bit of a bet that they are taking with shareholders that the court will invalidate a federally awarded patent, which rarely happens. Otherwise, the patents would not be worth the paper they are printed on. Sure hope CYAN wins this one.
good stuff! anyways this is how I see, this group with the patent made threats, said the news would kill CYAN share price. So CYAN pre empts them with a Suit. Makes sense to me if CYAN thinks it is easy to take care of. Next these patent holders will call carrot growers. LOLLOL.
If Cyanotech relents and stops mentioning eye health benefits, as you suggest, Valensa could claim victory and further seek damages against Cyanotech and compensation for prior sales gains made using eye health marketing. It appears that Cyanotech's only option/hope is to get the UI's patent invalidated (again, not likely). That is why I am concerned. Having said all that, and as an aside, if the price continues to fall, I will buy much more.
No kidding, Captain Obvious. The point is that UI holds a patent. They apparently are getting aggressive with Cyanotech in pressing their claim on the patent. Cyanotech is trying to get a court to invalidated a federally awarded patent (not likely). It looks like a desperate move by Cyanotech. If they did not have anything to worry about, why file a suit? If they lose, UI is going to eat their lunch. NOT GOOD>