Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[HDGabor]

BB- (&Relic)

Apparently Joe Kennedy does not understand either.

Of course he understands / knows what about it is … and used it against Generics' "obviousness" claim (as Secondary considerations / the invention’s commercial success) … not as support of Amarin's inducement claim.

Mr. Kennedy conducts cross examination of Ivan T. Hoffmann. Defendants’ 1606 is marked. Plaintiff’s exhibit 1218 is marked and admitted. The witness is excused.

Case 2:16-cv-02525-MMD-NJK, Document 355, Filed 01/22/20, Page 2 of 3.

V. EXPERT WITNESSES TO BE PRESENTED AT TRIAL ON THE ISSUES OF NONOBVIOUSNESS AND OBJECTIVE INDICIA OF NONOBVIOUSNESS

B. Defendants’ Witnesses

3. Ivan T. Hofmann
73. Mr. Hofmann is a Vice President and Managing Director at Gleason IP, an economic, accounting, and financial consulting firm. Amarin expects that he will testify concerning the issues of commercial success and nexus with respect to the Asserted Patents.

Case 2:16-cv-02525-MMD-NJK; Document 331; Filed 01/06/20; Page 16&20 of 284 (my emphasis)

Apparently you are who does not understand either …

Relic: but in the judges eye would this not undermined generic argument that the label will not induce infringement?

If I where the judge I would see the generic arguments that label does not induce and then this slides that make the assumption of market share a obvious lie to the judges face

See above & "inducement" could be "done" by the label. (The label is the "tool" how Generics communicate with physicians … how they could encourage (induce) physicians for direct infringement.

- - - - -
Best,
G