Three topics:
1) How is generics selling Generic Vascepa for RI indication, after invalidating a MARINE (not RI) patent, does not make a complete mockery out of the legal / regulatory system?
How is this any different than when a person x makes a bomb that only detonates when someone touches it? Then he leaves the bomb at a busy street and someone touches it and it deronates. After that, person X says that it was not his fault because he simply made the bomb. He blames it on a poor person who touched it.
Similar with our situation. More than 95% of Generic Vascepa that would be sold, would be sold for a patented RI indication. Generics will blame the pharmacists, just like the bomb maker would blame the rando who touched the bomb.
I am looking at this from a macro perspective, as I am sure that generics would be within legal bounds to do this. But from a macro level, is this what our regulatory system intended -- to allow a generic drug to be sold for a patented indication, under a disguise that generics are merely the 'bomb maker'?
2) Du using that 'study' (only 19 took EPA, only men, none had TG over 250) - how does she conclude that this makes anything obvious?! I am certain that she came in with a preconceived plan to side with generics and her only challenge was how to cherrypic the evidence to for it.
This wasn't even a remotely close call. Completely different population, of 19 men?! Since when did we stop caring about women?! I am curious if the study was of 4 rats instead, would she proclaim that it was 'obvious' too?
This has to be one of the worst court rulings of all time. This is literally gibberish. If there was ever a case to win on appeal, it is this one.
3) Why not do a 3 way deal? BP buys us at a 50% discount ($10B) and pays off a ridiculous settlement amount to generics ($1B ×3) to go away. Everyone walks away happy.
Generics walk away with $1B each.
We walk away with $24/ share.
BP walks away with paying $13B (10+3) for a $20B company.
One possible issue with this is if the patent loss applies only to the Hikma / Reddy / Teva, or any generic, since the ruling was that patents have been invalidated. If so, is there a way for generics to retract it?
