As a matter of appellate jurisprudence, if "evidence" is presented in the trial court that is "scientifically impossible," that evidence should not be considered "substantial evidence" for purpose of appellate court reliance to support the judgment of the trial judge. [scientific impossibility characterization trumps the notion that it was evidence on which the trier of fact could legitimately rely]
The fact is judge Du is incompetent for making decisions on clinical patent, she basically has no knowledge on basic statistics. And clinical trial analysis mind set.
The Kura issue This must be sent to Elizabeth at amarin This must be pursed in appeal It is vital along with Mori error as to Du have reached the wrong decision as to obviousness Alm
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
