Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[HDGabor]

g-

The GSK/TEVA case was the exception, but we do not know how this case will play out in appeal.

I do not see GSK/TEVA case as an exception* but as more clarity (?) on circumstantial evidence of intent (to infringe).

Whatever the "life" will be the case (en banc, SC ... if any) I do not expect a reversal.

a.) The full label period could not be a question ... Teva instructs prescribers by the label (direct evidence) ... decision about this period will / should be affirmed

b.) The skinny label period
The generic could "win" only ... I mean:
- If the Order will be affirmed they have a guideline (have already) what NOT to do, what is seen as circumstantial evidence of intent.
- In case of reversal they will have more "freedom" to infringe without legal / financial consequence

* The GSK/TEVA case was the exception (?) as interpret the generic conduct (outside of the label) more rigorously than in any (?) case before.

Best,
G

"Fun" fact: Circumstantial evidence was incorporated into patent law in 1986 in Moleculon Research Corp. v. CBS, Inc.48 In Moleculon, the patented invention was directed to method claims for making a Rubik’s Cube.