Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[HinduKush]

Our Amicus rejection is a disappointment but not unexpected... Everything about this case was a shocking exercise in global incompetence..Incompetence by a district court Judge with a political agenda, fraud by an expert perpetrated at the paid pleasure of the defendants, and incompetent Plaintiffs who managed to botch the defense of a perfectly sound argument for the prior art. What followed on appeal was a brutal exercise in cronism and cover up by a legal act of thuggery. What remains in dismissing this amicus reconfirms, (if that were needed), that this CAFC refuses to address: (1) The issue of how to parse primary and secondary indicia of obviousness, and in what context to evaluate secondary objective indicia in the face of a presumed prima facie obviousness (2) The issue of outright UNDENIABLE (except perhaps in a Federal court of Law) scientific misrepresentation to the point that a thinly veiled tissue of scientific analytical misconstructions was boldly developed into bare faced LIES using an expert witness as modus operandi.The shame of it is that NO ONE in the CAFC seems vaguely interested in what our Amicus exposed at least in part...the TRUTH. To coin a phrase..screw the precedent, what about the basic scientific truth?
The great English Lexicographer and father of the English Dictionary Samuel Johnson was reported as saying:
"The law is the last result of human wisdom acting upon human experience for the benefit of the public."
In fact and in evidence that is not the case today. Boswell who was Johnson's biographer and an attorney himself said: "As to precedents, to be sure they will increase in course of time; but the more precedents there are, the less occasion is there for law; that is to say, the less occasion is there for investigating principles."

We have on this board pointed out that the numerous scientific misrepresentations of one Jay W Heinecke (hiding behind the claim construction order of Judge Du which, he says gives him the right to say black is white and vice-versa). We have pointed out that Mori was misreprespresented in what it showed vis-a-vis LDL-EPA, and this was confirmed in Nature Biotechnology by amongst other eminent POSA's, the lead investigator of the REDUCE-IT trial, Dr Deepak Bhatt. This was apparently insufficient. We then clearly demonstrated that Dr. Heinecke perjured himself (at least scientifically if not legally), by insisiting on an utterly false statistical construction of what EPA effect on ApoB evidenced in Table 3 of the Kurabayashi paper. The central reason for the allowance of the MARINE patents was in fact the unexpected result and long felt unmet need of the singular ApoB effect of EPA in TG>500 patients. We further showed evidence that when asked HOW to interpret the self same data he admitted in sworn deposition that he relies on an intergroup statistic for comparison that he then shamefully abandons this standard in discussing ApoB for the Defendant's convenience.
But here is the last sting in this sordid tale: The entire construct for dismissing all this evidence was that Judge Du felt that Kurabayashi was not considered by the patent examiner and that furthermore the ApoB effects of EPA were obviously evident, and therefore (along with MORI) cause for negation of the MARINE patents. Here, we show that INFACT the self same "significant" effect of EPA on ApoB is in fact not p less than 0.001 as rperesented in teh Table 3, but actually p=0.11 and ipso facto, that the entire ApoB analysis by Heinecke and (coincidentally by Kurabayashi et al.)is in fact WRONG. There was NO significance in the EPA ApoB effect and there was NO effect in the control arm and further that when the two groups were appropriately compared using a Two way ANOVA OR even using intergroup unpaired t-tests there was NON-SIGNIFICANCE.
Is this just a raging storm in a teacup in the inevitable legal "battle between experts". Maybe? But was this debate of the scientific experts properly conducted, and more importantly was the scientific evidence properly represented? We humbly submit otherwise...
HK on behalf of EPADI II
Here is the evidence that shows that Kurabayshi showed nothing in regard to EPA and ApoB (for those who actually care about details):
https://investorshub.advfn.com/uimage/uploads/2020/10/13/gawrxkurabayshi_latest_analysis_ApoB_10_13-2020.png