InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 142
Posts 8676
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/07/2013

Re: eightisenough post# 280567

Tuesday, 06/16/2020 2:01:15 PM

Tuesday, June 16, 2020 2:01:15 PM

Post# of 430368
e-

I don't have access to the USPTO documents--just relied on Du's ruling.

Fine ... The Order says:

Also, this case is unlike many other obviousness cases because, when the Patent Office issued the patents-in-suit, it maintained its finding from earlier rejections that the prior art rendered all of the claims prima facie obvious. (Ex. 1521 at 1822-35, see also id. at 1830-31.) As the examiner explained, “it was concluded that it will be obvious to treat patients having triglycerides above 500 mg/dL with 96% pure ethyl-EPA."


and

"the Examiner concluded that it would be prima facie obvious to treat patients having TG above 500 mg/dl with 96% pure ethyl-EPA"

I stand corrected ... but please quote the relevant part of the Order (about USPTO PFO) that says: LDL-C and/or Apo-B effect is/are PFO acc. to the USPTO ...

Best,
G


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