Gilead essentially argues that Merck did not describe its claimed patents specifically enough in writing, so that a practitioner, ordinarily skilled in the art and science of bio-chemistry could make the invented compound, and see the claimed moiety. We should remember that Gilead has convinced the able Judge Labson Freeman in San Jose that Merck’s claims aren’t written with specificity precisely because (Gilead says) Merck simply copied these ideas from Pharmasset, during a later abandoned M&A due diligence process.
So, according to Gilead, Merck had stong incentive to avoid such a precise description, for fear that it would then be plain that the claimed invention was just cribbed from Pharmasset’s prior work. Here is Gilead’s motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, as a 13 page PDF file.
. . . .CLERK’S NOTICE RESETTING TIME OF MOTION HEARINGS.  MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law (Renewed) under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b),  MOTION for Attorney Fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 285. Motion Hearing set for 8/4/2016 01:30 PM before Hon. Beth Labson Freeman. . . .
Now you know. Onward, grinning ear to ear, about this evening. . . .