Also let's remember that Rosen itself ("itself" both in the reference to it being a law firm, and also that I don't consider their lawyers to be human beings) talks about the standard of law -- what a "reasonable person" would do or believe.

Would any reasonable person base an investment thesis in a biotech not on the science being developed by the company, not on the results of animal trials and preliminary results from human trials, but instead would decide to invest on the basis of which institution granted a Ph.D. to the chief scientific officer -- as a sole basis for investment? It boggles the mind that anyone could even think to make that claim.

I know some Harvard Ph.D.'s. I guess I'd better start a company with them because lots of people are just waiting to invest in a company on the basis of where they got their Ph.D.'s, if Rosen's thesis is correct.