InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 6
Posts 84
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/01/2020

Re: ziploc_1 post# 274201

Sunday, 05/17/2020 9:51:22 AM

Sunday, May 17, 2020 9:51:22 AM

Post# of 430607
Apples and oranges. Science isn’t law. Different standards for different things. Specific factual matters do not need to be shown by clear and convincing evidence. That is a legal point that I think I am right about. But if I am wrong, it should be possible for someone to cite case law showing that I am wrong. I would like to see such case law.

Whether Mori creates an expectation that EPA lowers triglycerides without lowering LDL-C in severe hypertriglyceridemia patients seems like a specific factual matter. So the generics should not need to show this by clear and convincing evidence.

Requiring the patients in Mori to have triglycerides greater than 500 mg/dcl before Mori can be considered in an obviousness analysis confuses the patent law concept of anticipation (where a prior art reference must show exactly the same thing as in a patent claim) with obviousness (where a prior art reference need only suggest what is in a patent claim).
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMRN News