Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[sts66]

Appears you are right that patent cases can have juries, but it's apparently not a Constitutional right. From Wiki, types of cases that can have juries - particularly ones where damages are requested:

The kind of trials that are not elligible to have a jury are called "equity cases."

The question of whether a case should be determined by a jury depends largely on the type of relief the plaintiff requests. If a plaintiff requests damages in the form of money or certain other forms of relief, such as the return of a specific item of property, the remedy is considered legal, and the American Constitution guarantees a right to a trial by jury. On the other hand, if the plaintiff requests an injunction, declaratory judgment, specific performance or modification of contract, or other non-monetary relief, the claim would usually be the one in equity.

But this law professor takes a look at having juries for patent cases and finds it unsupported by any laws:

http://patentlyo.com/patent/2014/01/jury-trials.html

Jury Trials in Patent Cases
January 19, 2014Dennis Crouch

In his recent work-in-progress article, Professor Mark Lemley focuses on the question of whether the Seventh Amendment protects the right to a jury determination of invalidity. His answer (and I paraphrase): Its complicated, but there is probably not a constitutional right to a jury trial on patent invalidity. In particular, Professor Lemley writes that the Supreme Court “is unlikely to find such a right [to a jury trial] to exist in the broad form lawyers and judges currently assume, though how the Court will rule may depend on the lens it uses to think about the Seventh Amendment.” Mark A. Lemley, Why Do Juries Decide if Patents Are Valid?, available at ssrn.com/abstract=2306152.

Lemley writes:

Curiously, while the right to a jury trial on patent validity issues is widely assumed, there is in fact no solid support in modern case law for such a right. The one case to hold that there was such a right, the Federal Circuit panel opinion in In re Lockwood, drew a sharp dissent from three members of the appellate court, was taken on certiorari by the Supreme Court, and was then vacated by that Court after the patentee withdrew its jury trial demand rather than face Supreme Court review. Nonetheless, both courts and lawyers have based two decades of practice on that uncertain foundation. The resulting practice is a hybrid one that is hard to link to any historical practice.

Here's Lemley's original paper if you want to peruse it, available for downloading - if he's correct, and it appears he is, the use of juries in patent cases would nearly cease if someone decided to appeal all the way to the USSC instead of chickening out in the case of Lockwood above:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2306152

Why Do Juries Decide If Patents are Valid?

Mark A. Lemley
Stanford Law School

August 5, 2013

Stanford Public Law Working Paper No. 2306152

Abstract:
For the last two decades, patent lawyers and courts have assumed that the Constitution requires that juries decide whether patents are valid. But that assumption rests on an uncertain foundation. Juries did not decide patent validity during most of American history, and as recently as 30 years ago jury trials in patent cases were quite rare. There is, surprisingly, no precedential decision resolving the Seventh Amendment question. And English practice before 1791 -- the basis for Seventh Amendment jurisprudence -- is ambiguous at best on whether juries must decide patent validity. I argue that if and when the issue is presented to the Supreme Court, the Court is unlikely to find a constitutional right to jury trial on issues of patent validity, and certainly not the broad right of the sort that is now common practice. Removing the jury from most patent validity determinations would change patent litigation in important ways.

Link to his paper - an interesting read:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID2306152_code32215.pdf?abstractid=2306152&mirid=1&type=2


So the question to "will or can juries be involved in AMRN ANDA patent litigation" is yes, if either side asks for one, although the legality of it is questionable at best.