j, what we don't know is what's the standard required to be qualified as "prior art". It might not need to require "hypothesis generating". Du seems to imply all she needs is the existence of any EPA/DHA scientific trial papers that she could infer any kind of potential EPA benefit on LDL/ApoB. Seems to me the clear and convincing evidence standard need not be applied to prior arts (how can it? Since non of those studies are clear and convincing), but only by looking at the Graham four factors together which Du did not perform. Unfortunately, some Federal Judges' allowance of the Prima facie-rebuttal approach, which weaken the the clear and convincing evidence standard required, might let Du get away with the murder.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
