Replies to post #260188 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[Hamoa]

I would agree that she got Mori wrong, but then, so did the USPTO. Dismissing Mori requires full buy-in to the concept that any study that doesn’t include a hypertriglyceridemia population isn’t relevant to an obviousness consideration, and neither the USPTO or Judge Du have gone for that. So I would think it unwise to assume that the appellate panel would do so. But that wouldn’t really concern me considering the likely effect, on appeal, of correcting Judge Du’s pretty glaring procedural errors. Had Judge Du followed correct procedure and included secondary considerations before making her judgement of prima facie obviousness, she would have had to reach a different conclusion. I believe that is what the appeals court will find.

[gandalf50]

Montana

I contend that Mori proved only that 56 fat
middle aged Aussies, who live in the remote
westernmost city of Perth, after a six week
dubiously conducted study.....using olive
oil, EPA and DHA components provided by "locally
available" providers...…

Mori did nothing but provide marginally useful
information. It is a study that does not make
any conclusive judgements that can even be
compared to the scope, thoroughness, and
conclusive nature of the Reduce-it study.

A term paper from the University of Tasmania
written by a student in 1995 has as much
pertinence.

The relevance of Mori is like a political poll.
Taking a poll of 56 people in one state is not
conclusive proof of who will win the election.

Is this really SO difficult to see.....?