Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
NS-I agree that judges usually side with the magistrate's report,
however reading the transcript, it seems that either:
(1) he never read the report--which might be true, since he was lacking a lot of info and details; or
(2) He disagrees with the report---as he seemed to side with hickma's attorney consistently, and grilled amrn's lawyer until the end.
I disagree with your second point, b/c Judges do not take into account the shifting of burden issue, when they decide a motion to dismiss.
Like you say amrn has bad luck with judges--we needed Hall to take the case--not andrew. His questions were outrageous--and seemed over his head here.
And this is a very strong case for us--imagine if it was borderline.....
eie
NS-you're correct, hence not so terrible that Andrew gave a hearing, since it was not an opinion (as gg quoted from cc).
However, it is still troubling, since j. Hall recommendation was right on--yet Andrew felt a need for a hearing.
If it was just to make all sides feel they got a fair chance--as you say--Andrew would not have come out of the gate and side with hikma for 2/3 of the hearing. He should have relied at least at the outset on the report ---instead of siding with hickma and attacking amrn.
Yes--at the end he started to get it--but I am nervous it took him so long--especially since he had Hall's very logical report in his hand--which he should have given much weight to.
eie
NS-Magistrates are commonly authorized by judges to write opinions--not just reports--so please show your source--if possible.
eie
NS-gg posted it was an "opinion"-which is a "decision",
And yes magistrate judges have full authority to render an opinion--IF assigned by the judge (here Andrew) (they could also be asked just to write a report or an accounting in complicated cases)
I quote from gg:
"KM said the following during yesterday's CC, "There was a magistrate opinion to deny this request for dismissal, then the district judge asked for an actual hearing"
If you have a better source than gg (who is one of the most accurate posters here) please share.
IF you are correct, and it was a report---than yes it less negative for amrn.
eie
capt-I don't get paid dyk's salary to follow the magistrate's gender :)>
raf--gg (today) quoted karim (from yesterday's cc)--which was not reported till now. I am not sure when exactly J. Andrew dismissed the Magistrate's opinion, must have been a few weeks before the oral hearing.
eie
gg-IF j. is liberal--he will grant motion to dismiss--to assure no jury trial. These judges are very manipulative...
ssty--judges rarely dismisses a magistrate opinion--yes judges are busy--but j. Andrew could have asked him initially not to write an opinion, yet he let him write it--and then disregarded it--very bad.
eie
kiwi-judges rarely disrespect a magistrate's opinion--hence terrible judge to be in front of, hence much lower chances, 40%
Like with the appeal of du--the judges makes all the difference.
sorry
eie
**gg&kiwi-terrible news! if true-that judge disregarded magistrate opinion--kiwi, I would lower dramatically success of the infringement suit to 40%.
And even if Judge Andrew allows case to continue--a judge with such bias=amrn is heading likely for a loss and an appeal.....2 more years...
eie
monk/hay-there'a a blessing we recite about people of your ilk...
liz/jas..-did you give private email as evidence in rule 60 motion???
I don't think so--so please keep your higher than thou attitude to yourselves.
Some talk and some act....
I have no more time to explain things to you anymore--
Enjoy
jas-call ceo to join--"fingers crossed" is lame...
BTW ceo is giving out medals tomorrow at his office --for al "loyal" shareholders....don't miss it...
kn-liz is correct--I helped marj REVEALING PERSONAL EMAIL in a PUBLIC record--which liz never did--for my own benefit....
And I am a shill for liz--she pays generously per post to protect amrn management.
eie
kn-Iv'e been vacationing from hedge f. salary to spread fear..
now jas,lb,liz hired me to protect jt for $1000 a post--much better money than the hedge funds :)>
eie
LBG,Tasty,liz--Beware: posters are working for management here--protecting their image....
No coincidence all this apologist came out hard--when the class action hit! :)>
eie
jas-they aren't corrupt? cash their options, make millions and refuse to join/make rule 60???
Yes--you lost all your credibility now....
I am starting to believe some posters here are doing management's job to protect their image among investors...
eie
ilov--you get it!, nothing wrong with being compensated for the malpractice of management!
One point I disagree-although singer wasn't amazing...by any stretch--the panel were out to get him.
Also--I m not sure If singer was part of the decision making not bring up Bhatt's paper--my gut feeling is it wasn't his call--rathe Kennedy was afraid of his liability...
eie
Hi trip--problem is analysts will throw down the middle softballs--afraid to "rock the boat" with ceo--they want to be on good terms for many reasons....
eie
"an investigation by Amarin should have been launched"--zip, all they care about is their liability!
A"good man" would have a long time ago--JOIN THE RULE 60 MOTION!
New ceo--who i am sure, is a "good person"---won't help marj with a finger---leaving all the shareholders in the dust--when the coa--will simply reject the appeal on standing, AND AVOID THE SUBSTANCE OF MISTAKE.
Where is the new ceo????
If I spent the money and time marj and others spent--I would bombard mang. with phone calls--requesting they join in...
"a leader like JTs reputation..."-are you kidding??
A TRUE leader has the strength to withstand pressure from his CORRUPT legal team (WORSE THAN ANY class action lawyers), and would have used bhatt's rebuttal of mori-to win the appeal!!!!
What is the insane defense of jt about?
you're so upset the sp declined 40 cents, so you try to belittle the legitimate class actions---by defending the ceo--who is truly at fault???
jas---please stop already---it is ludicrous....you've lost most of your credibility....
eie
kiwi-before the hearing 80%, after hearing the judge
(who was pro hickma for 3/4 of the hearing--until last 1/4 seemed to get it--that their label is infringement itself) I am a bit nervous--60-70%.
If the motion to dismissed is rejected and judge comes back to reality--I would upgrade our chances.
eie
"however it’s not worthy of an ambulance chaser’s lawsuit"--why not canes?
Do you have to kill someone to hold ceo accountable? come on now...
zip-sorry, I begged him in many emails to file 60--he refused. He was the boss--the buck stops by him.
All his losses are little compared to small guys...he is a millionaire many times over--cannot shed tears for him.
eie
zip-management are TRUE ambulance chasers here!
you're right, they should -but I am 99% sure they will not--to protect the board--and past management.
Management is the party all the posters here--should be aiming their bullets--they DESTROYED our hopes of large profit--and helping 100's of thousands of cardiac patients (as my father--who had 5 heart attacks and a heart transplant..).
Zip--you are the few here that "get it"! good for you.
eie
cap-we agree you're not a lawyer-so why act as one?
you boast how much money you made (homes bought and other properties all from your profits) and your 100% correct on science issues--
so stop acting as a lawyer--unless you want to open yourself to class action suits, from any poster listening to you.
You will not find you inquiries in google--only patients can "treat" themselves by Dr. google, but google did not yet pass the bar--so no google esq. yet.
And yes' any ip lawyer (that worked in top firm) will inform you--that a rejection based on p/a is a red flag and must be disclosed.
eie
alm-at ANY stage amrn may "intervene" to the motion/action of rule 60.
So "management" has no excuse not to join with marj and the rest of you here.
If they refuse you know why??? they fear they will be held "accountable" and surd for every dime they ever owned!
But most on this board--"protect" past ceo and Kennedey--and like to attack me and the class action lawsuits (that I have o interest in)
because they are SO short cited---concerned of p going 40 cents lower--while jt DESTROYED investors investment and hopes for six figure profits (myself included)....silly people here....
sorry for late response--I was out of posts when you posted to me...
I hope all is well by your family as well.
eie
zip--in law-the ceo "represents" the entire shareholder body--and not a small group of investors who are taking on goliath without support of the actual management.
That's is how corporate (law) america works--and it makes sense. Just as congress/president represents us to the world, so too the management od amrn represents the shareholders to the court and amrn's adversaries...
cap-you never worked for ip firm--abc of patent prosecution is clearing the P/A HURDLE.
If you cannot pass that hurdle in the uspto's eyes---that must be disclosed in sec filing, period.
Don't but it from me--you will observe the courts buy it--in favor of the indecent "ambulance chaser's lawyers".
time will tell..
gl
jas-amrn needs to be a "party" of the rule 60 motion, to assure standing--since the court could easily dismiss marj (although it shouldn't) for lack of standing--as hickma is arguing.
Also, if amrn is actually a party here, there is a much better chance for the court to rule in favor of marj and amrn's case regarding the substantive issue--the actual rue 60 motion of "mistake"--
for if amrn itself doesn't argue "mistake" (in mori etc)---then its tantamount to a "renter" or "bypasser"--screaming "police"--someone just destroyed the 'owner's building---while the actual owner remains silent.
Just issuing a press release is not sufficient "support"
gl in convincing the ceo
CAP-once p/a rejects patent-presumption is GONE. NOW, Co. must disclose p/a-"mori" was deemed valid p/a! Secondary cons. is so much weaker...
You will see, the "disgraceful" law firms will succeed in holding jt accountable--he was an accountant, WAY over his head...
alb
eie
dtg--you sound like my wife :>)--wait on line...
jas-actually ask to "intervene" as a party--a press release is too weak imho! email him asap!!!
gl
jas-I hope w/ all my heart you succeed!!! that is the way to go and focus energy.
a big gl!
eie
jas-limiting law firms to apple..is not capitalism, sorry...Every small co has potential to be gr8, dndn almost became a giant....
capt-when rej is p/a, in I.P. Law--it is MAJOR issue!--and company must disclose that patent was granted ONLY b'c of secondary method--and p/a deemed patents obvious.
Capitalism=Class Action Payoff-no conspiracy here. DTG conspiracy is worse than jfk conspiracy theory.
If you get CEO to join marj--sp will be at dtg $45!!!! or
If AMRN wins infringement suit...
jas-if us class suits are "disgrace"-try russia/china law system--I am sure you'll be crawling back to us markets :)>
Nothing wrong/indecent/disgrace allowing firms to compensate shareholders...ITS CALLED CAPITALISM!!!!
capt-FAILURE TO DISCLOSE uspto REJECTION of MORI, will not be ameliorated by standard disclaimers....no immunity here.
You and your friends are--spreading wrong info that amrn has immunity from suits b/c of standard disclaimers...
amrn--just failed to disclose---you guys are intentionally misinforming public....not good idea...
eie
YOU should BEG ceo to join marj---instead of waisting energy with cursing and hating the class action...