InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 237
Posts 10817
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/17/2006

Re: alm2 post# 267474

Sunday, 04/19/2020 7:14:13 AM

Sunday, April 19, 2020 7:14:13 AM

Post# of 426269
alm2....

I'm going to say it..The bet is the Appellate court is going to reverse Du and this is an asymmetric bet going the right direction unlike the district decision which was an asymmetrical bet going the wrong direction. There is no point in hedging here...the PPS will not go under $4 and will recover to a higher level than it is right now..Even on the remote chance Du will not be reversed.

IMO..The Appellate will reverse Du's judgement not because she made errors of fact. Not for secondary conditions which were ignored.and not because she used incorrect procedure.

She will be reversed for the stone cold fact her decision can not hold up because it induces infringement on Amarin's patents..She will be hung by her own reasoning...By agreeing generics using Vascepa for over twelve weeks would constitute indirect infringement by inducement. The thread here is generics can not legally use Vascpa for the R-I indication but only legally for the Marine indication....and then she does not understand that her decision leads inevitably to the same place...

Generics don't really care about the MARINE label...It is small and vague..The generics are after the the Dec 2019 post R-I label...Which could turn out to be the biggest drug in the world..The fact is the generics can get this simply by "Off labeling"..for the post R-I label. But there is a catch here and that is Judge Du has already said that if the Generics use Vascepa for the R-I indication, then they are indirectly infringing on Amarin's patents by inducement..So by her own reasoning her decision can not stand as the court would be inducing infringement on Amarin's valid R-I patents.

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