Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Hamoa]

I would suggest you read the below decision again, maybe a few times, and think a little harder about how it relates to our case. I would predict that the appeals court decision in our case will echo this almost verbatim.


In re Cyclobenzaprine Hydrochloride Extended-Release Capsule Patent Litigation, Nos. 11-1399, -1409 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 16, 2012)

“The Court further clarified the proper framework for making an obviousness determination generally. According to the Court, the district court erred by making its finding that the patents-in-suit were obvious before considering the objective (or “secondary”) considerations and by shifting the burden of persuasion to Cephalon. The Court reiterated the “expansive and flexible” nature of the obviousness inquiry, affirming that the fact-finder must consider all objective evidence before reaching an obviousness conclusion. This approach, the Court noted, guards against the hindsight bias by requiring the fact-finder to withhold judgment on an obviousness challenge until it considers all relevant evidence. In doing so, the Court rejected the formal burden-shifting approach taken by the district court, where secondary considerations are only considered to rebut a “prima facie” case of obviousness. The Court found the secondary considerations of nonobviousness particularly helpful in this case, determining that a long-felt need for an extended-release formulation and the failure of others to formulate one strongly support a conclusion of nonobviousness.”