InvestorsHub Logo

marjac

04/21/20 9:02 PM

#268188 RE: rafunrafun #268180

Wow! Amarin is not interested in mediation. This means that they are not amenable to discussion of settlement along the lines discussed at length on this Board. Namely paying the generics money and/or negotiating an entry date in order to settle the case.

That is how I interpret their reason for rejecting mediation. This answers a major question that has been on the minds of the Board since the adverse decision.

amarininvestor

04/21/20 9:07 PM

#268190 RE: rafunrafun #268180

contrary to binding precedent.




I like how that sounds....cannot wait too read the opening brief

Whalatane

04/21/20 9:51 PM

#268208 RE: rafunrafun #268180

thx for the DD
Kiwi

rosemountbomber

04/21/20 9:53 PM

#268210 RE: rafunrafun #268180

Great work Raf. Thanks

MateoPaisa

04/21/20 10:54 PM

#268221 RE: rafunrafun #268180

Thank you for this

rafunrafun

04/22/20 12:55 AM

#268239 RE: rafunrafun #268180

A slight correction, as I omitted a few words.

The following:

Question: Have there been discussions with other parties relating to settlement of this case? If yes, when?

Amarin: Yes. During the pendency of the case below.

Question: If "yes," were the settlement discussions mediated?

Amarin: No.


Is more accurately depicted in a link below, as I omitted a few words after "when". Should have followed with: "were the last such discussions?"

See here: