Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Meowza]

I have a few thoughts. All of them my own opinion, as a layman, commenting on the appearance of public documents.

Briefly lay scanning her order I noticed a few tidbits that were, well, different. First, she seems to dismiss:

Not until after publication of the Judgment, did anyone learn that this Court mistakenly

when she questions:

it offers little explanation why it never sought to intervene before entry of judgment

Duh?

And it's obnoxious she has more regard for Hikma's litigation than Amarin's patented innovation:

vacating its judgment would substantially prejudice Defendants, as it would nullify the years of work they put into ultimately prevailing in this case

Finally, speaking as a layman going by Du's wordage, she seems to suggest that "parallel" and "sequential" meanings in law are the opposite of how every other field uses those basic English terms:

privity can exist between corporations and their shareholders, see Headwaters Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 399 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir. 2005), that general principle does not apply here, where EPADI is effectively seeking a judicial determination that Amarin’s patents-in-suit are valid. Instead, the more applicable principle is that “parallel legal interests alone, identical or otherwise, are not sufficient to establish privity[.]”

...if anyone in EPADI owns the corporation that owns the patents, that's sequential not parallel, as those terms are commonly understood. But again maybe the law (according to Du) uses "parallel" contrary to every other area of life I've experienced.

Again all of the above is my own opinion, as a layman.