Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[HDGabor]

N-

Marketing thier product in any state where generic substitution is law would demonstrate knowledge of infringement.

(1) It is common knowledge to many in and out of the pharmaceutical field that physicians routinely prescribe approved drugs for purposes other than those listed on the drugs' labels; indeed, such off-label use is supported by both the FDA and the American Medical Association,
(2) Information regarding both on- and off-label prescriptions is readily available to the public from publications and databases to which most pharmaceutical companies subscribe,
(3) Pharmacists and other drug dispensing organizations . . . commonly substitute generic drugs for name brand drugs wherever possible — unless specifically instructed otherwise by the physician writing the prescription and in many states, substitution is mandatory
(4) Generic expects to get an "A-B rating" for its drug, which would allow physicians and pharmacists to substitute generic for brand regardless of the indication for which it is to be used, and
(5) Generic should be assumed to have considered the market size and growth potential when it made the strategic decision to file an ANDA and enter the market.

These statements are true ... however precedent holds that mere knowledge of possible infringement by others does not amount to inducement; specific intent and action to induce infringement must be proven. Thus, if a physician, without inducement by Generic, prescribes a use in an infringing manner, Generic's knowledge is legally irrelevant. In the absence of any evidence that Generic has or will promote or encourage doctors to infringe the patent, there has been raised no genuine issue of material fact.

Best,
G