Replies to post #269712 on Amarin Corp Plc (AMRN)

[alm2]

Excellent work send to amarin/ Covington
Alm

[ziploc_1]

Laurent...Thank you for another excellent post...If Amarin's lawyers make the arguments you outlined in your post, Amarin should prevail.

[circuitcity]

Appreciate the dd, but several comments:

1)you said “...Judge Du establishes that not raising LDL-C was prima facie obvious... but I remember Du granted long and unmet need what is it then?

2) Du also gave commercial success to amrn as a positive secondary and mentioned amrn almost break even NOW. Did Du make a mistake here? Because she supposed to look at the patent claims in the past when the patent was filed, instead of now. This clarification not help amrn though, I just want to a) point out for discussion whether Du totally messed up the time and b) in case our lawyer will be ambushed during appeal on this.

3) I prefer we can go back as what PTO found regarding the patent. If we establish that, I think we should and will, does that still give judges room to rule it obvious? Basically my question is if a PTO or a judge was given another case like marine with exact same findings/arguments (prima facie obvious with two postive sec), how a PTO or a judge will rule? Is it going to be non-obvious every single time or it is a close call could go either way?

[invest2992]

Where can I find these docs, I am not familiar with pacer so that seems out unless really easy to use. Has anyone placed them in google to share?