Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[alm2]

Marjac
As to your second paragraph

She stated POSa did not consider K ( but ? Is was she right or wrong on that point and why did she reach that conclusion - how was she persuaded of this ?

We know K was extant at the time POSA was considering patent application

Even if POSA was unaware of K because it was extant (as I understand patent law) the POSA should have taken it into account

Du would thus be right to both consider K and to say if POSA had considered K he would have taken it into account in the patent process

She obviously believed that if POSa had considered K he would not have granted patents

So Du did take it into account and ruled patents obvious

- because she was led to the wrong interpretation of K (by fraud by generics/ by mistake)

If she had been led to the correct view of K she would not have found patents obvious


Will it be the right approach to suggest Du was reaching the views she did because she had her own activist position as to patents ??

Or is it better to say well she was doing her job .... she thought K not considered by POSA ( identifying how she reached this viewi if one can eg lawyer for generics told her that K not considered by POSA )and she did the right thing thereafter in considering K - she was correct to consider K

But telling the FC that she had been misled by generics as to what K meant and ruled patents obvious because of this

Alm

Alm