InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 144
Posts 8676
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/07/2013

Re: eightisenough post# 266607

Thursday, 04/16/2020 11:14:05 AM

Thursday, April 16, 2020 11:14:05 AM

Post# of 426714
e-

you analysis is focusing too much on Kurabayashi and too less on fact Du has the USTPO ON HER SIDE!!!!

You are focusing too much on Mori, Hence, Mori is almost IRRELEVANT (the USPTO and Judge Du found that Mori support obviousness … and EPA vs DHA arm is irrelevant … it was not a null hypothesis ever), rather Kurabayashi is the key. (Mori will not be seen by the FC as "no teaching".) The USPTO did not see it as obvious and Judge Du interpreted incorrectly. The USPTO is not on HER SIDE regarding Kubayashi … but regarding Mori.

You're missing the point: Du can survive b/c "strong showing of obviousness."

You are missing the point: Du used Kurabayashi as "strong showing of obviousness." … meanwhile it is not … furthermore: it is an "unexpected benefit"

b/c we have 2 strong sec. cons. already.

Are two enough? Could be … but 3 is better than 2, especially if the third is "moving" from "strong showing of obviousness" to secondary consideration ("unexpected benefit").

Best,
G

Excuse me for cluttering board with theories that are off point … :-)

Disclosure: I wrote this post myself, and it expresses my own opinions (IMHO). I am not receiving compensation for it.

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMRN News