alm,
I look forward to receiving your observations. Thank you for being so supportive and always in my corner.
One thing though, I am not going to say anything negative about Amarin or their lawyers in the Reply Brief. We have filed three Briefs without such negativity, so we are not going to start now. Plus that is counterproductive, and would feed into our adversaries' negative stereotyping.
Our position has been consistent throughout. We don't know for sure exactly why Amarin did not file the Rule 60, but whatever the reason was, is largely irrelevant.
The only relevant fact is that they did not file it, and were never going to file it. Because they did not file it and were never going to file, EPADI II's interests were not adequately represented, and EPADI II could not have filed any earlier, because factually and procedurally, there were hurdles that needed to be overcome in order for Rule 24 Intervention Standing to accrue. No hyperbole promulgated by our adversaries will be allowed to obscure this reality.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
