Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[concapk]

Everything you mention in this post plus additional information was stated in AMARIN'S expert witness deposition ( DR TOTH ) to support AMARIN'S claim of NONOBVIOUSNESS ..... meaning no one could know the results, therefore it could not be OBVIOUS...

But the GENERICS are stating that that AMARIN had to claim in their patent submittal a written description ( that the drug would reduce trig's, raised apo3, lowered ldl, etc.) .... AMARIN could have known the results they were looking for when running the MARINE STUDY, to be used to get NDA approval for VASCEPA, but did not specify them in the MARINE patents submitted....

The patent wording, the USPTO clarifications in submittals, the FDA SPA concerning REDUCE-IT STUDY PARAMETERS, ETC.all worked on in yrs 2008/2009 will be looked at.... to clarify "WRITTEN DECSRIPTION" in MARINE PATENTS...