InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 62
Posts 7515
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 01/02/2003

Re: MontanaState83 post# 288030

Saturday, 07/25/2020 9:55:17 PM

Saturday, July 25, 2020 9:55:17 PM

Post# of 424552
Montana...The "other proffered S.C.'s of Amarin were the source of an error by judge Du in addition to her error in weighing negative against positive S.C.

QUOTE from the judge's decision..."while the Patent Office found that a decrease in Apo B was an unexpected benefit constituting a valid secondary consideration, the Patent Office’s examiner did not consider Kurabayashi. Where “the PTO did not have all material facts before it, its considered judgment may lose significant force."

In fact, the PTO DID consider Kura by several supervisors before approving the patent as non-obvious...so there WAS an "unexpected benefit" in the S.C.(which was used BY JUDGE Du as a negative to counteract the positive S.C.)...but which actually SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED AS A FURTHER POSITIVE S.C. to find the patent non-obvious
Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AMRN News