Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Laurent Maldague]

Thanks for the elaboration. Would it be possible to later on (for example during OA) suggest possible explanations why Amarin did not respond to the email or are we waived from expounding further on this point?

I say this because a very plausible explanation might be that Convington is picking the legal strategy that avoids possible airing of their incompetence (understanding of biostatistics). Basically, their interests are tainted by preservation of their image, and likewise with regards to the head of Amarin legal (Jospeph Kennedy).

In Kaufman v. Societe Internationale, the intervening shareholders claimed that the Interhandel suit was led by "enemy" shareholders (even though the end result would benefit all shareholders alike: a return of US seized assets to the corporation). Interveners wanted to intercede and only retrieve US seized assets proportional to "innocent" shareholders. (I believe this was all in the context of WW2).

Apparently this was enough for the SC to rule that intervening shareholders interests were/may not be adequately represented. I see the parallel here, where Amarin/Covington want to argue that secondary considerations should have overcome the prima facie case, whereas we are arguing the prima facie case was never properly achieved (and secondary considerations don't matter). There may be more prestige for Convington if they win in the manner they chose, at the expense of the more practical rule 60(b) route.