There’s no gray area for determining if her interpretation of Kurbayashi is a mistake. It’s not something that one expert could argue against the other, in which case you could give deference to one interpretation over another. 100% of trained statisticians would agree that Kurbayashi found no significant difference between EPA and control in reduction in ApoB. There is no room for interpretation. There is a clear mistake in finding of fact that wasn’t clear during the trial. Markman is suggesting deference is given to how Du interpreted arguments from on a finding of fact that can be argued one way or another. This can’t be argued - it is an error. Period.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
