These are salient points as they relate to the public welfare implications of Amarin's potential loss of exclusivity. They would certainly be on the mind of the appellate panel as they consider the case through the lens of the important role patents play in encouraging innovation. They're also relevant to a scenario where the appellate court encourages both sides to pursue a settlement (which the court will do), and the sides agree to settle on the condition that the district court's decision is vacated. Such a vacatur is permitted only in cases where the benefits of doing so to the two parties, the judicial system, and the public welfare are found to outweigh any harm to the public welfare caused by the removal of judicial precedent (i.e. the restoration of an invalidated patent).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
