I look forward to the Goodwin call tomorrow at 12:30P EST. Here is my simplistic, nutshell view of the case:
Huston (Amarin) - please send this case back to the lower court, where it belongs, so we can battle it out with the one generic manufacturer (of seven) who unlawfully induced patent infringement. Using well-established law and precedent, we will prove that Hikma actively induced patent infringement - with knowledge and intent.
Klein (Hikma) - "reversal is needed to harmonize Section viii (of Hatch-Waxman that created the "skinny label" carve out) with Section 271(b) (that imposes liability for patent infringement) to encourage legitimate competition that reduces drug prices." In other words, we would love for SCOTUS to rebalance the Hatch-Waxman compromise to heavily favor generic manufacturers. Both Republicans and Democrats can claim they are making prescription drugs more affordable. But most importantly, we don't want our guilty-a**es to be dragged back into Court to defend ourselves. So please just take our word for it that we didn't "actively infringe" on Amarin's patent. We are not saying we didn't intend to infringe on Amarin's patent - but our lawyers helped us write a disclaimer and told us to say that our attempts to unlawfully increase sales were actually intended to promote our stock in the investment community.
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
